1 / 12

QUICWA Compliance Collaborative

QUICWA Compliance Collaborative. Minneapolis American Indian Center. Results Of Compliance Monitoring Pilot Study For Pennington County. QUICWA Compliance Collaborative Minneapolis American Indian Center. Overview.

nhu
Download Presentation

QUICWA Compliance Collaborative

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. QUICWA Compliance Collaborative Minneapolis American Indian Center

  2. Results Of Compliance Monitoring Pilot Study For Pennington County QUICWA Compliance Collaborative Minneapolis American Indian Center

  3. Overview • Purpose of Study: to pilot the use by tribes of the QUICWA Compliance Checklist • Four SD tribes participated in the Pilot Study • Oglala Sioux Tribe • Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe • Yankton Sioux Tribe • Standing Rock Sioux Tribe • Tribes monitored compliance using a standardized checklist.

  4. About the Checklists • Tribes were trained on how to complete the checklist, and completed checklists either in the courtroom or based on file review. • 68 Checklists were completed across a 15 month period from April 2007 to June 2008 • The checklist consisted of 22 questions.

  5. Change Data • Comparison of Data: • 28 Checklists completed through Summer of 2007 • 40 Checklists completed from Fall 2007 to Spring 2008 • This comparison provides some trends as to whether changes in compliance occurred across the two time frames in which checklists were recorded. Caution! Because these samples of checklists were not a random sample, and constitute a relatively small number, caution must be made in interpreting and generalizing from these data.

  6. Jurisdiction Issues

  7. Notice Issues

  8. Attorneys Appointed/Appeared

  9. Active Efforts, Tribal Recommendations, Placement Preferences

  10. Interpretation of Trend Data On the whole, the trends noted between recording periods (1: through Summer of 2007) vs. (2: Fall 2007 to Spring 2008) were very positive in terms of increased compliance (although this pilot data should not be taken to reflect statistically significant findings). Thoughts of members of the Collaborative Circle (on 9/10/2008) as to why this occurred were: Better relationship between Pennington Court and Oglala Sioux Tribe More education on compliance for Court and DSS Presence of Oglala Advocate in Court Awareness that Compliance being Monitored Judge Kern presiding over court during this time, and she is more strict about ICWA compliance Increased attention/awareness overall by Court/DSS due to Task Force, Consortium and Collaborative Circles’ work over last few years

  11. QUICWA Compliance Collaborative Staff Paul Minehart Project Director (612) 879-1742 pminehart@maicnet.org George McCauley QUICWA System Administrator (612) 879-1730 gmccauley@maicnet.org

More Related