Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), also known as the Office of Indian Affairs, is the U.S. government administrative unit that manages Indian policy and fulfills trust duties for American Indians, Indian tribes, and Alaska Natives. The 2010 U.S. census indicates 2.9 million persons, or 0.9 percent, were American Indians and Alaska Natives alone, and 5.2 million, or 1.7 percent, alone or if combined with one or more other races. These figures are increases of 18 percent and 27 percent over the 2000 census population figures of 2.5 million and 4.1 million persons, respectively. The largest population numbers were in the western and southern census regions of the country; the greatest proportion was in Anchorage, Alaska; the largest population place was New York. The U.S. government indicates there are more than 560 federally recognized American Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages, each with its own authority based on fundamental sovereignty.

From the late 1700s, the BIA has taken various forms. Original policy and trust responsibilities were placed with the Office of the Secretary of War by an official act in 1789. The Office of Indian Trade operated from 1806 to 1822. The formal Office of Indian Affairs was established on March 11, 1824; it began in the Department of War (1824–1849), was transferred to the Department of the Interior (1849–1947), and was renamed the Bureau of Indian Affairs (1947–present).

Throughout most of its existence, the BIA was integrally involved in virtually all aspects of the lives of Native Americans. The BIA administered the health, welfare, education, employment, and, at times, even the physical location of tribes throughout the country. Millions of pages of BIA archival documents confirm this pervasive influence and include records such as treaties, ledgers, claims, litigations, surveys, journals, correspondence, and speeches.

Today, the BIA structure is organized into Offices of Indian Services, Justice Services, and Trust Services; field offices; and 12 regions that offer programs and initiatives that cover a wide variety of areas of responsibility. In general, the BIA promotes self-determination through an emphasis on decentralization and local control. On an annual basis, the BIA distributes federal funding ($2.4 billion in fiscal year 2008) directly, through contracts and grants, and through compact agreements with tribes. More specifically, the BIA supports educational services to about 48,000 students in more than two dozen day and residential schools, colleges, and universities throughout the country. It delivers social services, as well as law enforcement and detention services. It maintains specific infrastructure such as certain roads, bridges, dams, and irrigation systems. It manages approximately 56 million acres of land held in trust, as well as trust assets of those lands, including, for example, natural and mineral resources such as forests. Finally, it is involved in energy and economic development with specialized business and loan programs to Indian enterprises.

Public Opinion and Moving Forward

Public opinion about the BIA has varied. Historically, the BIA—and specifically its policy-making authority—was seen by some as a positive authority toward assimilation, by others as a mixed-results power of paternalism, and by still others as a deculturalizing force of theft and destruction against Native peoples and their sovereign rights and resources through countless unfulfilled treaty obligations. The diversity of views has continued in modern times. From 1996 to 2010, for example, the BIA was involved in Cobell v. Norton, a lawsuit relating to historical accounting practices and claims of mismanagement. The case took some unusual turns; in 2001, for example, while it was pending, the case severely restricted public access to current government information as the BIA was ordered to sever all computer and information technology connections with the Internet that contained or connected to personal Indian trust data. The case went through district and appellate courts, but Congress did not support the legal decisions and did not appropriate funds for a settlement until November 30, 2010 (Claims Resolution Act of 2010).

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading