Effectiveness of the Office for Victims of Crime Tribal Victim Assistance Program

Audit Report 06-08
February 2006
Office of the Inspector General

According to the 2000 Census, 4.1 million people,1 or 1.5 percent of the total population, identified themselves as American Indians or Alaska Natives (Native Americans).2 Despite the relatively small Native American population, a 2001 study conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) indicated that Native Americans are more likely to be victims of rape or sexual assault, aggravated assault, and simple assault than people of any other race in the United States.3 In 1988, the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) created the Victim Assistance in Indian Country (VAIC) Discretionary Grant program to establish, expand, and improve victim assistance services in Native American communities governed by federal criminal jurisdiction. The VAIC program was designed to address the lack of victim assistance programs and bridge the gap between criminal justice agencies and service providers. Under the VAIC program, during Fiscal Years (FYs) 1999 through 2002, the OVC provided funding totaling $ 5,466,995 directly to 40 Native American communities to help them establish reservation-based victim assistance programs. In FY 2003, the OVC expanded the VAIC program to all federally recognized tribes, regardless of criminal jurisdiction, and renamed it the Tribal Victim Assistance (TVA) program. During FYs 2003 and 2004, the OVC has awarded $4,976,524 under the TVA program to 24 Native American communities throughout the United States. Under the OVC tribal victim assistance program, applicants are required to plan and implement a 3-year program to improve the ability of Native American communities in providing direct services to crime victims.4 Tribal grantees are encouraged to demonstrate strategies that include collaboration with appropriate local and federal agencies involved in assisting victims. Specifically, collaboration with the following agencies is deemed essential under the OVC tribal victim assistance program: (1) the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices (USAO); (2) the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); (3) state, local, and tribal criminal justice agencies; (4) Indian Health Services; (5) child protective services; and (6) other appropriate tribal and non-tribal agencies. Audit Objective The Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) previously conducted an audit on the Administration of Department of Justice Grants Awarded to Native American and Alaska Native Tribal Governments, Report No. 05-18, March 2005. The prior audit found significant issues with the adequacy of grant monitoring, which is an essential management tool that ensures grant programs are implemented, objectives are achieved, and tribal grantees have expended funds properly. Additionally, the report noted that the granting agencies did not ensure that tribal grantees submitted the necessary information to assess grant implementation or to achieve the grant program objectives. Further, there was no consistency in the information provided in the required progress reports that were submitted. As a result, we initiated the current audit as a follow-up to evaluate the effectiveness of the OVC tribal victim assistance grant program. The objective of our audit was to obtain grant performance information directly from tribal grantees and to evaluate whether the grants were fully implemented and the program objectives were achieved. Summary of Findings and Recommendations Based on our review, we found a wide range in the effectiveness of the four individual grantee tribal victim assistance programs. This range resulted, in part, because the OVC did not incorporate adequate strategic planning into its victim assistance program, which was necessary to implement effective performance-based management. Office for Victims of Crime We found that the OVC did not establish any long-term or annual program goals for its tribal victim assistance program by which program effectiveness could be measured. In addition, the OVC was not required to provide performance information with its budget requests for the tribal victim assistance program; as a result, program funding decisions were not tied to program effectiveness. We also found that the OVC did not conduct any evaluations to determine the effectiveness of its tribal victim assistance program. However, in FY 2001 the OVC did provide approximately $25,000 in funding to the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to conduct assessments of four tribal victim assistance grant recipients to determine whether or not the tribal grantee programs could be evaluated. The OVC also provided the NIJ with an additional $425,200 to evaluate the effectiveness of two 2003 TVA grantees with awards totaling $197,689.5 The NIJ awarded a grant to conduct this evaluation to the American Indian Development Associates, Inc. in September 2005. The evaluation will take place over a 2-year period and should be completed by December 2007. We discussed our concerns with OVC and NIJ officials about spending $425,200 to evaluate two individual grant programs totaling less than $200,000. The officials stated that although the evaluations cannot be used to determine the effectiveness of the OVC tribal victim assistance program as a whole, they expect that the findings will produce lessons learned for similar tribal programs. We also found that OVC program officials and tribal grantees were not held accountable for performance results. There was no guidance from the OVC on collecting performance information, nor was there consistency or comparability among tribal grantees in how the data was reported. Performance information also was not used to evaluate the effectiveness of the OVC tribal victim assistance program as a whole or the effectiveness of individual grantee tribal victim assistance programs. As a result, we were unable to compile information from tribal grantee progress reports to generate statistical information on the program results for the OVC tribal victim assistance program as a whole. Instead, we attempted to evaluate the effectiveness of individual grantee tribal victim assistance programs, as discussed in the following sections of this report. We selected four tribal grantees who received victim assistance funding and for which financial audits were conducted previously as part of our prior audit.6 Those four tribal grantees were:   •  Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan   •  Oglala Sioux Tribe, Pine Ridge, South Dakota   •  Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, Philadelphia, Mississippi   •  Lummi Indian Nation, Bellingham, Washington Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe effectively implemented a comprehensive victim assistance program that bridged the gap between the criminal justice system and victims. We found that: the tribe generally achieved the objectives of its tribal victim assistance grant, which were consistent with the overall goal of the OVC tribal victim assistance program; the number of victims served increased by 30 percent during the first year of the grant (1999) and by 86 percent over the life of the entire grant (1999 through 2002); the program was considered effective by victims, and by tribal and federal collaborating agencies in meeting both short‑ and long‑term victim needs; and the program was sustained after the OVC grant funding expired. Oglala Sioux Tribe The Oglala Sioux Tribe did not effectively implement a comprehensive victim assistance program that bridged the gap between the criminal justice system and victims. We found that: the tribe did not accurately report performance information in its progress reports; the program did not demonstrate an increase in the number of victims served during the period reviewed (2001 through 2004); the program was never fully implemented due to frequent changes in program management; the program was not considered effective by tribal collaborating agencies; and the tribe did not establish a plan to sustain the program after the OVC grant funding expired. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians did not effectively implement a comprehensive victim assistance program that bridged the gap between the criminal justice system and victims. We found that: the tribe only partially achieved the grant objectives outlined for its victim assistance grant; the tribe did not include all required performance data in its progress reports, and did not accurately report the performance information that was included; the program focused solely on victims of non‑major domestic crimes, of which the majority of victims contacted declined services; the tribe did not maintain data on the number of victims served; instead it reported on the number of police reports reviewed, which does not provide an adequate basis for measuring effectiveness; the number of police reports reviewed decreased by 4 percent from 2000 to 2004; the program was generally considered effective in meeting the specific needs of victims of non-major domestic crimes by the victims who requested services and the tribal collaborating agencies; however, the program was considered to be limited; and the tribe did not establish a plan to sustain its victim assistance program when the victim assistance grant funding expired. Lummi Indian Nation The Lummi Indian Nation effectively implemented a comprehensive victim assistance program that bridged the gap between the criminal justice system and victims. We found that: the tribe generally achieved its tribal victim assistance grant objectives, which were consistent with the overall goal of the OVC tribal victim assistance program; the tribe accurately reported performance information in its progress reports; the number of victims served increased by 51 percent during the first year of the grant program (1999) and by 716 percent over the life of the entire program (1999 through 2004); the program was considered effective by the victims, and by tribal and federal collaborating agencies in meeting both short‑ and long‑term victim needs; and the tribe did not establish a plan to sustain its victim assistance program when the victim assistance grant funding expired. Overall Summary and Conclusion Based on our review, we found a wide range in the effectiveness of the four individual grantee tribal victim assistance programs. Specifically, we found that the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe and the Lummi Indian Nation effectively implemented comprehensive victim assistance programs that bridged the gap between the criminal justice system and victims. Conversely, the Oglala Sioux Tribe and the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians did not effectively implement comprehensive victim assistance programs, as shown in Table 1. TABLE 1. ANALYSIS OF EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES   SAULT STE. MARIE TRIBE OGLALA SIOUX TRIBE MISSISSIPPI BAND OF CHOCTAW LUMMI INDIAN NATION Achieved grant objectives Yes Yes Partially Yes Services available to all victims of crime Yes Yes No Yes Accurately reported performance measures No No No Yes Increased the number of victims served7 Yes No No Yes Considered effective by victims Yes Yes Yes Yes Considered effective by tribal collaborating agencies Yes No Partially Yes Considered effective by federal collaborating agencies Yes Yes N/A8 Yes Established a plan to sustain the program Yes No No No     Overall program assessment Effective Not Effective Not Effective Effective Generally, we found that the tribes who implemented a successful tribal victim assistance program effectively coordinated with tribal, state, and federal criminal justice agencies and social service providers. Additionally, these programs provided services to tribal victims of all crimes, rather than focusing on a specific type of crime. Tribes that did not implement a successful tribal victim assistance program: (1) did not have consistent program leadership; (2) did not coordinate effectively with tribal, state, and federal criminal justice agencies and social service providers; and (3) focused on victims of specific crimes rather than providing services to all victims of crime. Our audit identified several concerns that we consider impairments to the effectiveness of the OVC tribal victim assistance program as a whole, as well as victim assistance programs implemented by individual tribal grantees. Specifically, we found that: the OVC tribal victim assistance program structure and design did not incorporate any strategic planning, which was essential for management to adequately evaluate program effectiveness, the OVC did not use performance information reported by tribal grantees to manage and improve performance of the tribal victim assistance program, and the OVC could not demonstrate program results because required progress reports were not always submitted and tribal grantees did not include all required performance measures in their progress reports. As a result, we made seven recommendations in this report that focus on specific steps the OVC should take to incorporate adequate strategic planning into its tribal victim assistance program. Specifically, our recommendations seek to ensure that: long-term and annual performance goals are established to measure program results and resource allocation decisions reflect program effectiveness; progress reports contain all required performance measures and performance data is comparable among tribal grantees; and performance measure information reported by tribal grantees is used to report on the effectiveness of the OVC tribal victim assistance program as a whole, and to evaluate the effectiveness of individual grantee tribal victim assistance programs. Footnotes This statistic includes 2.5 million individuals in the United States who identify themselves as Native American, and another 1.6 million who identify themselves as part Native American. Throughout this report, the term “Native Americans” is used to indicate American Indians and Alaska Natives. BJS Special Report, Violent Victimization and Race, 1993-98, March 2001. Throughout this report, the phrase “OVC tribal victim assistance program” is used to refer to both the former VAIC and current TVA programs. According to OVC officials the evaluations will cover the entire 3-year award period, which would include grant funds totaling $554,531, rather than the $197,689 for FY 2003 that was specifically identified in the grant solicitation. See Appendix III for a summary of the financial audits previously conducted for each of the four grantees selected for this audit. This statistic does not include an evaluation of the total number of crimes reported during the period. The FBI and USAO were unable to provide feedback on the tribe’s victim assistance program because these agencies are only responsible for major crimes committed on tribal lands, while the tribe’s program focuses on victims of non-major domestic crimes.