Effectiveness of the Office for Victims of Crime Tribal Victim Assistance Program
Audit Report 06-08
February 2006
Office of the Inspector General
I. OFFICE FOR VICTIMS OF CRIME
We evaluated the OVC tribal victim assistance program to determine whether the program had a well-defined purpose intended to support a specific problem. The OVC tribal victim assistance program was designed to support the lack of victim assistance programs “on reservations” and in remote parts of Indian Country, where violence is higher than for any other ethnic group. In other words, the purpose of the OVC tribal victim assistance program was to bridge the gap between criminal justice agencies and service providers. Tribal grantees generally address long-term victim services through referrals to appropriate local tribal and non-tribal agencies, including Indian Health Services, child protective services, mental health clinics, and hospitals. As stated in the Introduction Section of this report, services that are provided under the OVC tribal victim assistance program include 11 general purpose areas. However, in our review of the OVC tribal victim assistance program, we found that because of limited funding, grant objectives generally concentrated on providing short-term services that immediately fell into two categories: (1) responding to the emotional and physical needs (excluding medical care) of crime victims; and (2) advocating on behalf of crime victims, which included transporting and accompanying crime victims to criminal justice offices and courts. In order to effectively address short-term victim needs and provide advocacy on behalf of crime victims, collaboration with the following agencies is essential under the OVC tribal victim assistance program: (1) the USAOs, (2) the 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. As a result, we focused our audit on the effectiveness of the OVC tribal victim assistance program in meeting immediate victim needs, providing advocacy on behalf of crime victims, and collaborating with tribal and non-tribal law enforcement agencies, courts, and service providers. The OVC tribal victim assistance program was designed to address multiple types of victimization. However, we found that there are currently similar programs that appear to address specific types of victimization that might be duplicated under the OVC tribal victim assistance program. These programs include:
As shown in Table 1, during FYs 2000 through 2004, the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) and the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) awarded grants totaling $77.16 million to Native American communities, for the programs listed above.
An OVC official stated that they reviewed the tribal victim assistance program grant applications to determine whether the focus of the program addressed crimes not covered by other programs. The official also stated that they would not fund programs that only addressed domestic violence or child abuse, since there was funding available through other sources for these types of victimization. However, as shown in Finding IV, we found that the OVC funded the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians victim assistance program, which focused on victims of non-major domestic crimes. We evaluated the OVC tribal victim assistance program structure and design to determine whether the programs incorporate adequate strategic planning, which is essential in evaluating program effectiveness. We found that the OVC tribal victim assistance program structure and design does not incorporate any strategic planning. Specifically:
Since no long-term or annual performance goals were established for the OVC tribal victim assistance program and performance information was not reported or tied to budget requests, we reviewed the program to determine whether evaluations were conducted on a regular basis. We 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 NIJ to conduct assessments of four tribal victim assistance grant recipients to determine whether or not the tribal grantee programs could be evaluated. The assessment reports were issued in July 2004, and recommended that three of the four individual grantee tribal victim assistance programs be evaluated. It was also suggested that the fourth program might be a good candidate for an evaluation. The programs are listed below.
The OVC also provided the NIJ with an additional $425,200 to evaluate the effectiveness of two 2003 TVA grants awarded to the Lummi Indian Nation and the Passamaquoddy Tribe at Pleasant Point. The two grants to be evaluated, which were funded in the amount of $197,689, were awarded for the period September 1, 2003, through August 31, 2004.17 The evaluation will take place over a 2-year period and should be completed by December 2007. According to the solicitation, evaluations of these two programs will inform and enhance knowledge in the development and implementation of victim services in Native American communities. Specifically, the information gathered from the evaluation will be used by the OVC to report on the progress of the tribal victim assistance program and the delivery of services to victims in Native American communities. It will also be used to inform tribal, state, and federal leaders, and government funding agencies on the delivery of victims’ services to multiple sites in Indian Country. In our judgment, expending $425,200 to evaluate grant programs with funding totaling less than $200,000 may not be the most effective use of limited victim assistance resources. We discussed this issue with OVC and NIJ officials, who 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 evaluated the OVC tribal victim assistance program to determine whether performance information was used to manage the program and improve performance. In order to evaluate the adequacy of program management, we reviewed the OVC tribal victim assistance program to determine whether:
As stated previously in the Introduction section of this report, the OVC required tribal grantees receiving tribal victim assistance funding to include information on performance measures in their progress reports. However, we found that the OVC did not provide any guidance to tribal grantees on collecting and reporting performance information. The OVC also did not provide tribal grantees with definitions of the terms used in the required performance measures, such as what constitutes a victimization, service, publication, or training workshop. Additionally, the OVC did not provide any guidance on tabulating performance information. For example, if a victim received crisis counseling on 10 separate occasions, the OVC did not provide guidance as to whether the tribal grantee should report 1 service to the victim, or 10. During our audit, we found instances where one grantee reported one service per victim in some periods, and the number of times the same service was provided in other periods. As a result of the OVC’s failure to provide guidance to tribal grantees on collecting and reporting performance information, there was no consistency among tribal grantees’ reporting. Therefore, the reported performance information was not comparable between tribal grantees. Additionally, we also found that despite the fact that tribal grantees were required to include performance information in their progress reports, the OVC did not use the reported information to manage its tribal victim assistance program or improve performance. Specifically:
We evaluated the OVC tribal victim assistance program to determine whether the OVC demonstrated progress in achieving the overall program objectives. Although the OVC did not provide any guidance on collecting and reporting performance information, we attempted to use statistical data from the tribal grantee progress reports to assess the effectiveness of the OVC tribal victim assistance program as a whole for the required performance measures. We reviewed the progress reports submitted by each of the 25 tribal grantees awarded 2003 victim assistance grants for the periods ending December 31, 2003 ; June 30, 2004 ; and December 31, 2004. Based on the results of our review, we found that the performance data contained in the submitted progress reports could not be used to generate statistical information on the effectiveness of the OVC tribal victim assistance program as a whole. Specifically, we found that:
Based on our review, it does not appear that the OVC ensured that progress reports contained the required information on performance measures when the reports were submitted. We also found that there was no consistency among tribal grantees in how performance information was reported. For example, for the performance measure on the number of publications produced, we found that some tribal grantees reported the number of new publications developed during the period, while others reported the number of copies of the same publication generated during the period. As a result, the number of publications produced, ranged from 1 to 26 for those tribal grantees reporting on the number of new publications, and 100 to 2,500 for tribal grantees reporting on the number of copies of the same publication. In another example, we found that for the performance measure on the number of volunteer hours, one grantee included staff time in excess of a normal work day as volunteer hours. As stated previously, we also found instances where one grantee reported one service per victim in some periods, and the number of times the same service was provided in other periods. We believe that the OVC needs to establish a standardized progress report that captures required performance measure information and includes guidance to tribal grantees on collecting and reporting the information. This information should include definitions of terms used in the required performance measures, such as what constitutes a victimization, service, publication, or training workshop, and also should include guidance on tabulating performance information. Additionally, the OVC needs to ensure that required progress reports are submitted with all required performance measure data. We found that the OVC did not incorporate adequate strategic planning into its tribal victim assistance program, which was necessary to implement effective performance-based management. The OVC also did not establish any long-term or annual program goals for its tribal victim assistance program by which program effectiveness is 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. At the time of our audit, the OVC had not conducted 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 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. The NIJ awarded a grant to conduct this evaluation to the American Indian Development Associates, Inc. in September 2005. We discussed our concerns related to expending $425,200 to evaluate two individual grantee tribal victim assistance programs with funding totaling less than $200,000 with OVC and NIJ officials. 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. Finally, we attempted to review progress reports submitted by each of the 25 tribal grantees awarded 2003 victim assistance grants to determine whether the OVC tribal victim assistance program demonstrated progress in achieving its objectives. We found that OVC program officials and tribal grantees were not held accountable for performance results. Reported performance information 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. Additionally, as a result of the OVC’s failure to provide guidance to tribal grantees on collecting and reporting performance information, there was no consistency in how performance information was reported, and the information reported was not comparable between tribal grantees. As a result, we were unable to compile information from progress reports that generated 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 the four tribal grantees, who received victim assistance funding, for which financial audits had been conducted previously as part of our audit on the Administration of Department of Justice Grants Awarded to Native American and Alaska Native Tribal Governments, Report No. 05-18, March 2005.18 Those tribal grantees, discussed in separate findings later in this report, included the:
In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the victim assistance programs implemented by the four individual tribal grantees, we determined whether each tribal grantee:
We recommend that the OVC:
The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians is a federally recognized Indian tribe located near the city of Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, near the Canadian border. The tribe has more than 29,000 enrolled members, most of whom live off the reservation in the recognized tribal service area, which covers approximately 1,265 acres throughout seven counties of the eastern Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe indicated in its grant application that the majority of crimes occurring within tribal lands included domestic violence, sexual offenses, and child abuse. The majority of cases addressed by the tribe’s victim assistance program are related to domestic violence, child physical abuse, and child sexual abuse. The tribe proposed to strengthen services to victims of crime by hiring a victim services coordinator to assist victim advocates in providing comprehensive services through its Victim Advocacy Center. The application also stated that the additional position was necessary because the Victim Advocacy Center was unable to provide the best possible assistance to victims due to the wide service area covered. For example, it is a 6-hour round trip between Sault Ste. Marie and Marquette, Michigan, where the nearest USAO and FBI offices are located. As shown in Table 2, the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe was awarded a victim assistance grant, including three supplemental awards, totaling $184,004.
Implementing the Grant Program Objectives In its original grant application and award documentation, the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe established program objectives and measures to track progress, which were consistent with the overall goal of the OVC tribal victim assistance program, as shown in Table 3.
We found that with the exception of hiring a victim advocate within 1 month of the grant start date, timelines had not been established for achieving grant objectives. However, the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe generally accomplished the goals and objectives outlined for its victim assistance grant. We were unable to determine whether the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe was successful in increasing the services provided to crime victims. During the grant period, the tribe made several changes in the way that it collected and reported data related to the number of services provided to victims. As a result, the data was not comparable between reporting periods. Additional information related to statistical data is discussed later in this section of the report. We found that the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe generally submitted required progress reports with the required information. However, the final progress report was not submitted, as shown in Table 4.
Additionally, we found that progress reports did not accurately reflect the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe ’s victim assistance grant program activity. The statistical information reported in the progress reports submitted to the OVC could not be verified to source documentation. Tribal grantee officials could not provide an explanation as to why the statistical information maintained by the program did not match what was reported. Statistical Data Supporting Program Performance The statistics reported for the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe ’s victim assistance program included data for all grant programs administered by the tribe’s Victim Advocacy Center. During FYs 2000 through 2004, the tribe also received $ 3,762,529 in awards through the following DOJ grant programs, which include a component of victim assistance:20
Tribal grantee officials stated that it was not possible to separate out statistics for a particular grant. Officials also stated that they did not receive any guidance from the OVC on collecting and reporting performance information, including definitions of terms used in the required performance measures, such as what constitutes a victimization, service, publication, or training. They also did not receive guidance on tabulating the performance information. For example, if a victim received crisis counseling on 10 separate occasions, the OVC did not provide guidance as to whether the tribal grantee should report 1 service provided or 10. During the grant period, the tribe reported both one service per victim and the number of times the same services were provided to a victim depending on the requirements of other grants. As a result, the number of services provided was not comparable between reporting periods. Although statistical data was not reported accurately, the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe did maintain data related to the number of victims served. As a result, we were able to generate statistical information on that requirement and used our data to assess the effectiveness of its victim assistance program. The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe received its victim assistance grant in 1999; therefore, we used 1998 statistical data as the baseline for the grant. We found that the number of victims served increased each year of the grant program, indicating that the tribe implemented an effective victim assistance grant program.
As shown in Chart 1, the number of victims served increased by 30 percent, from 173 to 224, during the first year of the grant (1999).21 Additionally, the number of victims served increased by 86 percent, from 173 to 321, between the year prior to the grant (1998) and the last full year of the grant (2002). Because the program ended in September 2003, we did not have a full year of data for 2003 to include in our analysis. However, based on the number of victims served during the first 9 months of 2003, we projected that the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe could have provided services to as many as 401 [(301 divided by 9 months) multiplied by 12 months] victims in 2003. Victim Assistance Program Achievements We selected a sample of case files that the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe maintained to document services provided to crime victims. We found that the tribe provided a wide variety of comprehensive services that bridged the gap between the criminal justice system and victims. Specifically, during our review of case files, we identified the following services provided:
In addition, Sault Ste. Marie tribal officials provided the following services that were not documented in the case files included in our sample:
We provided questionnaires to six victims who received services from the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe’s Victim Advocacy Center, and who indicated a willingness to be contacted. They were asked to identify what services were received and whether or not the services were effective in meeting their needs. Based on the six responses, victims were generally satisfied with the services provided and felt that they were effective in meeting their needs. Services identified by victims included: (1) crisis counseling, (2) transportation, (3) advocacy, (4) support through the Women's Talking Circle, (5) temporary housing, (6) food, and (7) legal services. Based on our review of the services provided to victims and the responses to the recipient questionnaires, the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe’s victim assistance program is effectively providing needed services to crime victims. Collaborating with Criminal Justice Agencies and Service Providers According to Sault Ste. Marie tribal officials, the victim assistance program collaborated with many different agencies, both within and outside the tribal community. These agencies included, but were not limited to those listed in the following chart:
During the audit, we conducted interviews with representatives from tribal law enforcement, the tribal prosecutor’s office, the tribal court, and tribal social services. From these interviews, we determined that each of the collaborating agencies believed that the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe’s victim assistance program was effective in meeting victims’ needs. Specifically, representatives from the tribal collaborating agencies made the following statements:
Additionally, we provided questionnaires to representatives from the FBI and USAO. From these questionnaires, we determined that both agencies believed that the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe’s victim assistance program was effective in meeting victims’ needs. Representatives from the FBI and USAO made the following statements about the tribe’s victim assistance program.
Based on the responses to our interviews with representatives from tribal law enforcement, the tribal prosecutor’s office, the tribal court, and tribal social services, and questionnaires with collaborating agencies, we found that the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe’s victim assistance program was effective in meeting both short- and long-term victim needs. The collaborating agencies agreed that the victim assistance program provided much-needed victim services that were not available through other sources. Sustaining the Victim Assistance Program The OVC tribal victim assistance funding received by the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe expired on September 30, 2003. Although it had been over one year since the funding had expired, we found that the tribe sustained its victim assistance program. The tribe also reclassified a position authorized under the state VOCA program and used that funding to continue the position originally funded under its victim assistance grant. Based on the results of our review, the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe effectively implemented a comprehensive victim assistance program that bridged the gap between the criminal justice system and victims. W e found that:
Although we found that the victim assistance program implemented by the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe was effective, we noted that the statistical data in the progress reports included all grant programs administered by the tribe’s Victim Advocacy Center and was not reported accurately. In addition, we found that the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe did not receive any guidance from the OVC on collecting and reporting performance information, including definitions of terms used in the required performance measures, such as what constitutes a victimization, service, publication, or training. The tribe also did not receive guidance on tabulating the performance information. As a result, the performance data was generally not comparable between reporting periods.
The Oglala Sioux Tribe is a federally recognized Indian tribe situated in southwestern South Dakota on the Nebraska state line about 50 miles east of the Wyoming border. The Pine Ridge reservation is home to approximately 40,000 tribal members and covers approximately 2.8 million acres of grassy plains and badlands. The reservation includes Shannon and Bennett counties, which have been identified as the two poorest counties in the United States, with an average per capita income of $6,285 and $10,106, respectively. According to Oglala Sioux Tribe officials, the types of crimes occurring within the boundaries of the Pine Ridge reservation included: murder; sexual assault; child sexual assault; gang violence; elder abuse; burglary; driving while impaired (DWI) and driving under the influence (DUI); and vandalism. However, the majority of cases addressed by the Oglala Sioux Tribe’s victim assistance program were related to victims of domestic violence, assault, and elder abuse.23 As shown in Table 5, the Oglala Sioux Tribe received two victim assistance grants, including a supplemental award, totaling $532,714.
Implementing the Grant Program Objectives Based on the Oglala Sioux Tribe’s grant application and award documentation, we identified the following objectives for Grant No. 2002VRGX0011, which we determined were consistent with the overall goal of the OVC tribal victim assistance program.
Under Grant No. 2003VRGX0012, we identified five additional objectives, which we also determined were consistent with the overall goal of the OVC tribal victim assistance program. They were to:
We found that timelines and measures were not established for achieving grant objectives. Tribal grantee officials stated that it was difficult to establish timelines because of the crisis-oriented nature of the victim assistance program. Officials stated that although timelines were not established, the program was constantly striving to establish and re‑establish working relationships with the tribal police, the tribal prosecutor’s office, and social services, to expand and improve the services provided to crime victims throughout the reservation. Despite the fact that measures and timelines had not been established, we found that the Oglala Sioux Tribe generally accomplished the objectives outlined for its victim assistance grant. However, at the time of our review, none of the hired advocates focused specifically on gang violence. Rather, each advocate provided services to all victims of violent crimes. We found that the Oglala Sioux Tribe generally submitted required progress reports with the required information. However, the final progress report for Grant No. 2002VRGX0011 was not submitted, as shown in Table 6.
Additionally, we found that progress reports did not accurately reflect victim assistance grant program activity. The statistical information reported in the progress reports submitted to the OVC could not be verified to source information. Tribal grantee officials could not provide an explanation as to why the statistical information did not match what was reported. Statistical Data Supporting Program Performance Although statistical data was not reported accurately, the Oglala Sioux Tribe did maintain data related to the number of victims served. As a result, we were able to generate statistical information and use the data to assess the effectiveness of its victim assistance program. The tribe received its victim assistance grant in 2002; therefore, we used 2001 statistical data as the baseline for the grant. We found that the number of victims served did not increase as a result of the OVC tribal victim assistance funding.
As shown in Chart 2 (excluding 2002), the number of victims served remained relatively constant between 2001 and 2004, only increasing by 6 percent between the year prior to the grant (2001) and the last full year of the grant (2004). We also found that the significant increase in the number of victims served during 2002 did not accurately reflect program activity and the number of victims served decreased between 2001 and 2003. As a result, based on the number of victims served, the Oglala Sioux Tribe did not effectively achieve the objectives of its victim assistance grant. The current program director has only been in place since December 2004, and was unable to comment on program operations prior to that time. However, she stated that the tribe’s victim assistance program is constantly working to re-establish relationships with the different “players,” such as Cangleska, Inc., the tribal police, the tribal prosecutor’s office, and social services.24 As stated previously, the significant increase in the number of victims served during 2002 did not accurately reflect program activity. That data was based on the number of police reports received by the victim assistance program rather than the number of victims served. Tribal grantee officials stated that the program director at that time created a victim file for each police report received regardless of whether or not services were provided. We reviewed a sample of victim files for 2002, and found that generally, they only contained a police report with no mention of any services provided. Victim Assistance Program Achievements We selected a sample of case files that the Oglala Sioux Tribe maintained to document the services provided to crime victims. We found that the tribe’s victim assistance program provided a wide variety of comprehensive services to victims that bridged the gap between the criminal justice system and victims. Specifically, during our review of case files, we identified the following services provided to victims:
We provided questionnaires to six victims, who received services from the Oglala Sioux Tribe’s victim assistance program, and who indicated a willingness to be contacted. We asked them to identify what services were received and whether or not they were effective in meeting victims’ needs. Based on the six responses, victims were generally satisfied with the services provided and felt that they were effective in meeting their needs. The services identified by the victims included: (1) transportation to court hearings, (2) support during court hearings, (3) personal advocacy, (4) assistance paying utility bills, and (5) provision of food and other necessities. Based on our review of the services provided to victims and the responses to the recipient questionnaires, the Oglala Sioux Tribe’s victim assistance program is providing needed services to crime victims. However, the number of victims served did not increase as a result of the grant program. Collaborating with Criminal Justice Agencies and Service Providers According to the Oglala Sioux Tribe officials, the victim assistance program strived to re-establish working relationships with many different agencies, both within and outside the tribal community. These agencies included, but were not limited to those listed in the chart on the following page:
We conducted interviews with representatives from tribal law enforcement, the tribal attorney’s office, and Cangleska, Inc. From these interviews, we determined that each of the collaborating agencies believed that the Oglala Sioux Tribe’s victim assistance program was not effective in meeting victims’ needs. Specifically, representatives from the tribal collaborating agencies made the following statements:
Additionally, we provided questionnaires to representatives from the FBI and USAO with whom officials from the Oglala Sioux Tribe victim assistance program collaborated. From these questionnaires, we determined that both agencies believed that the tribe’s victim assistance program was effective in meeting victims’ needs. Representatives from the FBI and USAO made the following statements about the Oglala Sioux Tribe’s victim assistance program:
Based on the responses to our interviews with representatives from tribal law enforcement, the tribal attorney’s office, and Cangleska, Inc., and questionnaires with collaborating agencies, we found that the Oglala Sioux Tribe’s victim assistance program was somewhat effective in meeting victim needs. The FBI and USAO agreed that the victim assistance program provided much-needed victim services. However, the tribal collaborating agencies also believed that because of the constant change in program leadership, the tribe’s victim assistance program was not effective in bridging the gap between the criminal justice system and the service providers. Sustaining the Victim Assistance Program According to its initial application, the Oglala Sioux Tribe proposed several plans to sustain its victim assistance program, including:
At the time of our review, the tribe had not implemented any of the proposed plans listed above. Tribal grantee officials stated that they were currently trying to identify other long-term grants to sustain their victim assistance program when the OVC tribal victim assistance program funding expired. Based on the results of our review, 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:
Although we found that the victim assistance program implemented by the Oglala Sioux Tribe was generally not effective, we noted that the grant program objectives were generally achieved. Based on the questionnaires provided to victims, we found that they believed that the tribe’s victim assistance program was effective in meeting their specific needs.
The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians is a federally recognized Indian Tribe located near the city of Philadelphia, Mississippi. The tribe has more than 8,100 enrolled members, with 6,500 living on or near the reservation. The Choctaw Reservation consists of eight scattered, isolated, rural communities in east central Mississippi. The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians indicated in its grant application that many of the Choctaw people live in homes characterized by substance abuse, verbal and physical aggression, sexual abuse, mental illness, poor marital relations, and poor discipline habits. The application further stated that social problems of this nature inevitably manifest into a great deal of criminal activity, with domestic violence being one of the most common crimes committed. As shown in Table 7, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians received two victim assistance grants, including three supplemental awards, totaling $293,050.
Implementing the Grant Program Objectives According to the grant applications of the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, the goal of the victim assistance program was to offer a full‑service program to victims of any crime, with particular emphasis on the safety, health, and autonomy of domestic violence, and sexual assault victims and their dependents. Tribal grantee officials stated the victim assistance program originally focused on providing assistance to tribal victims of all types of crimes. However, tribal law enforcement officials felt it would be better if they, rather than the program, addressed the needs of victims of violent crime so that the victim assistance program would not interfere with any on-going investigations. As a result, the tribe’s program currently focuses on victims of non-major domestic crimes. We believe this is not the most effective use of limited OVC tribal victim assistance funding because domestic violence funding is available through other DOJ programs, such as STOP Violence Against Indian Women Discretionary Grant Program. We determined from the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians’ application and award documentation for Grant No. 1999VRGX0011, that the objectives of its initial victim assistance grant were to:
Additionally, we determined from the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians’ application and award documentation for Grant No. 2003VRGX0003, that the objectives of the subsequent grant were to:
These objectives were consistent with the overall goal of the OVC tribal victim assistance program. However, we found that the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians only partially achieved the objectives of its own victim assistance program:
We were unable to assess whether the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians achieved a 25-percent increase in the utilization of services within the first 6 months of the grant, because it did not maintain sufficient baseline data prior to or after receiving the initial grant in 1999. In addition, we were unable to assess whether the tribe increased victim utilization of the services because, as stated previously, they did not collect information on the number of victims served. We also found that the client files were not organized in a manner in which services provided could be readily identified. Victims had multiple files depending on the type and quantity of services provided, and therefore there was no single record documenting the assistance provided. The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians also did not establish measures to track progress toward achieving grant objectives. However, as shown in Table 8, the tribe did establish timelines for achieving grant objectives for the first year of Grant No. 1999VRGX0011.
Additionally, as shown in Table 9, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians also established timelines for achieving grant objectives for Grant No. 2003VRGX0003.
We found that Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians did not provide specific performance information in progress reports, as the OVC required. Specifically, progress reports did not include information on the number of victims served or the types of victimization. Instead, the tribe reported and maintained data on the number of police reports reviewed, which does not provide an adequate basis for measuring program effectiveness. Additionally, progress reports did not accurately reflect the tribe’s victim assistance grant program activity. Based on the results of our review, we found that the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians did not submit or did not submit in a timely manner 50 percent (6 of 12) of the required progress reports under its victim assistance program, as shown in Table 10.
Statistical Data Supporting Program Performance The statistical information reported in the progress reports submitted to the OVC could not be verified to source information. Tribal grantee officials could not provide an explanation as to why the statistics did not match what was reported. We used the information, however, to generate statistical data for the grant, although data on the number of police reports reviewed was maintained, rather than data on the number of victims served. We found that the tribe did not maintain baseline data prior to receiving its victim assistance grant in 1999, and as a result, we could not fully assess the impact of its victim assistance program. However, based on our analysis of available data, we found that the number of police reports reviewed fluctuated during the award period.
As shown in Chart 3, the number of police reports reviewed fluctuated between 2000 and 2004, decreasing by 4 percent from 2000 – the first full year of the grant program – through 2004.26 Based on the number of police reports reviewed, we believe the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians did not effectively achieve the objectives of the victim assistance grant. Victim Assistance Program Achievements The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians did not report or maintain data on the number of victims served, but instead reported and maintained data on the number of police reports reviewed. Generally victims were contacted (which could be construed as a service) to determine if victim assistance services were required. However, the majority of victims contacted (about 95 percent in 2004) declined additional services. For those victims contacted who indicated a need for services, we selected a sample of case files and found that the files were not organized in a manner in which services provided could be readily identified. We found that victims had multiple files depending on the type and quantity of services provided. Therefore, there was no single record documenting the assistance provided. Based on our review, we found that the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians provided a variety of services to victims of non‑major domestic crimes that bridged the gap between the criminal justice system and victims. Specifically, during our review of case files, we identified the following services provided to crime victims:
In addition the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians’ victim assistance program provided the following services that were not included in our case file review:
We provided questionnaires to 12 victims, who received services from the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians’ victim assistance program, and who indicated a willingness to be contacted. They were asked to identify what services were received and whether or not the services were effective in meeting their needs. Based on the two responses we received, victims were generally satisfied with the services provided and felt that they were effective in meeting victims’ needs. Victims stated that they received assistance in obtaining protective orders, counseling, and information about domestic violence. Based on our review of the services provided to victims and the limited responses to the recipient questionnaires, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians’ victim assistance program provided needed services to victims of non-major domestic crimes. However, the majority of victims contacted declined services. Collaborating with Criminal Justice Agencies and Service Providers According to tribal grantee officials, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians’ victim assistance program collaborated with many different agencies, both within and outside the tribal community. These agencies included, but were not limited to those listed in the following chart:
We conducted interviews with representatives from tribal law enforcement, the tribal courts, and tribal social services. From these interviews, we determined that the collaborating agencies believed that the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians’ victim assistance program was somewhat effective, although limited, in meeting victims’ needs. Specifically, representatives from the tribal collaborating agencies made the following statements:
We also provided questionnaires to representatives from the FBI and USAO, and determined that neither agency was able to provide feedback on the tribe’s victim assistance program. This was due to the fact that the FBI and USAO are only responsible for major crimes committed on tribal lands, while the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians’ victim assistance program focuses on victims of non-major domestic crimes. Based on the responses to our interviews with representatives from tribal law enforcement, the tribal courts, and social services, and questionnaires with collaborating agencies, we found that the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians’ victim assistance program was somewhat effective in meeting victim needs. However, the collaborating agencies considered the victim assistance program to be limited, because it focused on victims of non-major domestic crimes. Sustaining the Victim Assistance Program The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians did not provide a plan to sustain its victim assistance program when the program funding expired. However, according to tribal council officials, they are very supportive of the victim assistance program and currently fund a portion of it. Tribal grantee officials also stated that they are actively seeking additional grant funding to expand and improve the program and will continue to make requests to the tribal council for continued support, especially in the event that OVC tribal victim assistance program funding is not awarded in the future. Based on the results of our review, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians did not effectively implement a comprehensive program that bridged the gap between the criminal justice system and victims. W e found that:
The Lummi Indian Nation is a federally recognized Indian tribe located within Whatcom County, Washington, approximately 5 miles west of the city of Bellingham and 20 miles south of the Canadian border. The tribe has approximately 4,259 enrolled members, with 2,564 living within the Lummi Indian Reservation. The Lummi Indian Reservation consists of a land base containing 12,504 acres of upland area and 8,000 acres of tideland area. According to the grant application submitted for Grant No. 1999VRGX0012, the Lummi Indian Nation proposed to address the safety, advocacy, and healing needs of crime victims, and to build a community consensus more resistant to criminal abuse. The tribe’s victim assistance program was established in 1990 with a state VOCA grant to provide an ongoing and comprehensive network of victim services to a variety of crimes occurring within the reservation, including child abuse; assault; DWI and DUI; robbery; and sexual abuse and assault. As shown in Table 11, the Lummi Indian Nation received three victim assistance grants, including three supplemental awards, totaling $481,752.
Implementing the Grant Program Objectives Based on the Lummi Indian Nations’ grant application and award documentation, we identified the following objectives for Grant Nos. 1999VRGX0012 and 2001VRGX0001, which we determined were consistent with the overall goal of the OVC tribal victim assistance program, as shown in Table 12.
The Lummi Indian Nation also proposed to continue the objectives listed in its subsequent grant, No. 2001VRGX0001. According to the grant application for Grant No. 2001VRGX0001, each objective would be implemented over the life of the grant, and so, specific timelines were not established. We also identified 12 additional objectives from the Lummi Indian Nations’ application and award documentation for Grant No. 2003VRGX0012, which were consistent with the overall goal of the OVC tribal victim assistance program. They were to:
Despite the fact that timelines were not established for Grant Nos. 1999VRGX0012 and 2001VRGX0001, we found that the Lummi Indian Nation generally implemented the objectives of its victim assistance program. However, although the tribe successfully continued operating a 24-hour help line, victim advocates generally manned it rather than volunteers. As shown in Table 13, we found that the Lummi Indian Nation did not submit or did not submit in a timely manner 62 percent (8 of 13) of the required progress reports under its victim assistance program. For Grant No. 2003VRGX0007, we were unable to determine whether three reports were submitted in a timely manner, because the reports were not dated. However, we found that the progress reports submitted accurately reflected the tribe’s victim assistance grant program activity.
Statistical Data Supporting Program Performance The Lummi Indian Nation received its victim assistance grant in 1999; therefore, we used 1998 statistical data as the baseline for the grant. As stated above, we found that the progress reports submitted by the tribe accurately reflected actual activity under the victim assistance program. As a result, we were able to generate statistical information on the number of victims served and use our data to assess the effectiveness of the program. We found that the number of victims served generally increased each year of the grant. Our analysis revealed that the victim assistance program demonstrated an increase in services and activities as a result of the OVC tribal victim assistance grant funding received. Tribal grantee officials stated that it would be possible to track the number of victims served by each funded victim advocate position under the program. But since the grant program only funded a portion of some victim advocate positions, this would still not accurately reflect the number of victims served. We also found that the statistical information reported in the progress reports submitted to the OVC could generally be verified to source documentation, with no material differences. Tribal grantee officials stated that these immaterial differences were due to timing differences in entering the information into the tribe’s computer system. The differences we noted appear to support this statement. For example, statistical information in the progress report was generally lower than that included in the victim assistance database, indicating that information was entered into the system after the progress report was prepared. Statistics reported for the victim assistance program included data for all grant programs administered by the Lummi Indian Nation. During FYs 2000 through 2004, the tribe received $ 1,872,559 in awards through the following DOJ grant programs, which include a component of victim assistance:27
As shown in Chart 4, the number of victims served increased by 51 percent, from 37 to 56, during the first year of the grant (1999).28 Additionally, the number of victims served increased by 716 percent, from 37 to 302, between the year prior to the grant (1998) and the last full year of the grant (2004). We did not have a full year of data for 2005 to include in our analysis. Based on the number of victims served during the first 5 months of 2005, we projected that the Lummi Indian Nation could have provided services to as many as 214 victims in 2005 [(89 divided by 5 months) multiplied by 12 months]. We discussed the apparent decline in victims served during 2005 with tribal grantee officials, who indicated that the statistics were cyclical in nature and that generally, a greater number of crimes were committed during the summer months, which were not included in our 2005 data. Victim Assistance Program Achievements We selected a sample of case files that the Lummi Indian Nation maintained to document services it provided to crime victims. We found that the tribe provided a wide variety of comprehensive services to victims that bridged the gap between the criminal justice system and victims. Specifically, during our review of case files, we identified the following services provided to victims:
In addition, the Lummi Indian Nation tribal offices provided the following service that was not included in our case file review:
We provided questionnaires to 12 victims, who received services from the Lummi Indian Nation’s victim assistance program, and who indicated a willingness to be contacted. They were asked to identify what services were received and whether or not they were effective in meeting their needs. Based on the two responses we received, the victims were generally satisfied with the services provided and felt that they were effective in meeting their needs. Victims stated that they received assistance in obtaining a divorce, food, housing, transportation, counseling, and referrals. Based on our review of the services provided to victims and the responses to the recipient questionnaires, the Lummi Indian Nation is effectively providing needed services to crime victims. Collaborating with Criminal Justice Agencies and Service Providers According to tribal grantee officials, the Lummi Indian Nation’s victim assistance program collaborated with many different agencies, both within and outside the tribal community. These agencies include, but were not limited to those listed in the following chart:
During our audit, we conducted interviews with representatives from tribal law enforcement and the tribal prosecutor’s office. From these interviews, we determined that both agencies believed the Lummi Indian Nation’s victim assistance program was effective in meeting victims’ needs. Specifically, representatives from the tribal collaborating agencies made the following statements:
Additionally, we provided questionnaires to representatives from the FBI and the USAO. From these questionnaires, we determined that both agencies believed the Lummi Indian Nation’s victim assistance program was effective in meeting the needs of victims. Representatives from the FBI and USAO made the following statements about the Lummi Indian Nation’s victim assistance program.
Based on the responses to our interviews with representatives from tribal law enforcement and the tribal prosecutor’s office, and questionnaires with collaborating agencies, we found that the Lummi Indian Nation’s victim assistance program was effective in meeting both the short- and long-term needs of crime victims. The collaborating agencies agreed that the program provided much-needed victim services that were not available through other sources. We believe the victim assistance grant program was effective in bridging the gap between the criminal justice system and service providers. Sustaining the Victim Assistance Program The Lummi Indian Nation could not provide a plan to sustain its victim assistance program when the program funding expired. Tribal grantee officials stated that if the OVC victim assistance program funding was terminated, they would seek funding through the tribal council and other grant funding to continue the victim assistance program. Based on the results of our review, the victim assistance program for 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:
Although we found that the victim assistance program implemented by the Lummi Indian Nation was effective, we noted that the statistical data in the progress reports included all grant programs administered by the Lummi Indian Nation’s victim assistance program. Additionally, tribal grantee officials could not provide a plan to sustain the victim assistance program when the OVC program funding expired.
The 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 ensuring that grant programs are implemented and objectives are achieved. Additionally, the report noted that the granting agencies did not ensure that tribal grantees submitted the necessary information to assess grant implementation and the achievement of grant program objectives. We also found there was no consistency in the information provided in the required progress reports that were submitted. Specifically:
These findings are consistent indications that the OVC and other granting agencies are not effectively monitoring and administering DOJ grants awarded to tribal governments. Additionally, the DOJ has no assurances that the objectives of its tribal-specific grant programs are being met or that expenditures of grant funds are in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, guidelines, and terms and conditions of the grants. 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. For the current audit, we evaluated the effectiveness of the four tribal grantees, who received victim assistance funding, for which financial audits had been conducted as part of our previous audit. Those tribal grantees included the:
To evaluate the effectiveness of individual grantee tribal victim assistance programs, we determined whether each tribal grantee: (1) implemented its tribal victim assistance grant objectives, (2) accurately reported grant activities in progress reports, (3) maintained statistical data supporting program performance, (4) documented any program accomplishments, (5) coordinated effectively with criminal justice agencies and service providers, and (6) developed plans to sustain the victim assistance program when the grant funding expired. 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 14.
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. Factors Impacting Grantee Program Effectiveness 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 to the victim assistance programs implemented by individual tribal grantees. These concerns are related to the:
In Finding I of this report, 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. We also found that the OVC did not establish long‑term or annual performance goals, which were necessary to promote program results and accountability. Additionally, the OVC did not tie program funding decisions to program effectiveness, ensuring that resource‑allocation decisions reflected such effectiveness. As a result, we recommended that the OVC establish long-term and annual performance goals for its tribal victim assistance program and that resource allocation decisions reflect program effectiveness. In addition, we found 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 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. 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 related to expending $425,200 to evaluate programs with funding totaling less than $200,000 with OVC and NIJ officials. They 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. Collecting and Using Performance Information In Finding I of this report, we also found that the OVC did not provide any guidance to tribal grantees on collecting and reporting performance information. The OVC also did not provide tribal grantees with definitions of terms used in the required performance measures, such as what constitutes a victimization, service, publication, or training workshop. Additionally, the OVC did not provide any guidance on tabulating the performance information. As a result of these failures, there was no consistency among tribal grantees in how performance information was reported. We believe consistent and comparable performance information between tribal grantees is essential for the early identification of poor program performance. As a result, we recommended that the OVC provide tribal grantees with definitions of terms used for the required performance measures and guidance on tabulating the performance information reported. We also found that despite the fact that tribal grantees were required to include performance information in their progress reports, the OVC did not use the reported information to manage its tribal victim assistance program or to improve performance. Specifically, the OVC did not summarize the performance information reported by tribal grantees in order to report on its tribal victim assistance program as a whole. Performance information also was not used to evaluate the effectiveness of the individual grantee tribal victim assistance programs. We believe that the OVC needs to summarize the performance information reported by tribal grantees in reporting on the effectiveness of its tribal victim assistance program as a whole. We also believe that the OVC needs to utilize performance information to evaluate the effectiveness of the individual grantee tribal victim assistance programs and to follow up with tribal grantees demonstrating poor program performance. Progress Toward Achieving Program Objectives Finally, in Finding I of this report, we attempted to generate statistical information from tribal grantee progress reports and use this information to assess the effectiveness of the OVC tribal victim assistance program as a whole. We found that the required progress reports that were essential for effective monitoring were only submitted for 68 percent (17 of 25) of tribal grantees reviewed.31 Further, the OVC did not ensure that tribal grantees reported on the required performance measures: only 8 percent of tribal grantees reported on all 6 performance measures for the period ending December 31, 2003; only 24 percent for the period ending June 30, 2004; and only 28 percent for the period ending December 31, 2004. Therefore, the performance data contained in the progress reports submitted by tribal grantees could not be used to generate statistical information on the effectiveness of the OVC tribal victim assistance program as a whole. As a result, we recommended that the OVC establish a standardized progress report that captures required performance measure information. In addition, we recommended that the OVC ensure that progress reports include required performance measure data. 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. Our audit identified several concerns that we consider impairments to the effectiveness of the OVC tribal victim assistance program as a whole, and victim assistance programs implemented by individual tribal grantees. Specifically, we found that:
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, which is necessary to implement effective performance-based management. Specifically, we recommend that the OVC:
Footnotes
|
« Previous | Table of Contents | Next » |