been affected for many generations and to bring your voice into this discussion,” said Bradley. “Giving us an opportunity to hear those voices is so critical and so important.”

The meeting consisted of two sessions facilitated with a World Café model of engagement. The first session focused on stressors that impact health and well-being, and the second focused on the future vision of cumulative impact assessments.

CURRENT AND FUTURE STRESSORS

For the first session, participants divided into small groups for facilitated discussions of three main questions, with rapporteurs from each group providing report-outs afterward. The questions were:

• What are the main stressors experienced in your community now, and how will they change in the next 10 to 20 years?
• What makes your community more vulnerable to stressors?
• What are the barriers to strengthening your community’s ability to respond to stressors?

Stressors Faced by Communities

Battling a sense of invisibility

Rachel Morello-Frosch (University of California, Berkeley) provided the first report-out focused on conversations about current stressors. She said that the main topics that emerged from the conversations in her room were visibility, sovereignty, education, and economic opportunity.

The issue of visibility arose repeatedly, with participants talking about how the “settler myth” contributes to a false idea that Native American communities no longer exist. Several participants described how, in their experience, Tribal communities must constantly educate people about the fact that they are here and have communities. Tribal members also feel the need to demonstrate that they have resources and are entrepreneurs. The ways that Native people are portrayed in mainstream culture can contribute to making Native people invisible. Some participants noted that recent efforts and successes by Native people in representing their cultures and societies in mainstream media help to affirm their continued presence and cultural diversity. These representations highlight the existence of multiple nations, distinct histories, and the various ways in which Native communities come together to build social, political, and economic systems.

The question of sovereignty was another repeated theme in the discussions. Many participants noted issues around the federal recognition of tribes and the process by which tribes are federally recognized.

Several participants also noted that the settler myth has perpetuated the idea that Native Americans are supposed to be poor, leading to an underappreciation of the business culture in Native communities and dampening economic opportunity. They highlighted the ongoing impacts of intergenerational trauma, which can have a chilling effect on the desire to achieve success or otherwise stand out, even in a positive way.

Some participants noted that the millennial generation of Native Americans is speaking out more, engaging in technology, and developing new networks. One participant described barriers to accessing digital tools and technologies, especially among elders, and ongoing educational

work on the use of these technologies and platforms including those that extend beyond communication.

Several participants also discussed their experiences in the pre-K through grade 12 educational system, as well as issues around access to college, pathways to graduate school, and economic opportunities and repercussions more broadly. Some participants commented that Native youth may struggle to balance identity formation and relationship building in a K–12 system that does not allow them to express who they are or affirm cultural ties.

Morello-Frosch concluded with an optimistic outlook on the potential of global networks made possible by technology, noting that these tools are enabling Native people to connect not only across the United States but also across the globe. She said that the discussions in her room highlighted promising examples of information sharing and network building, suggesting that such connections hold significant potential for addressing shared challenges and advancing collective goals. James Rattling Leaf, Sr. (University of Colorado, Boulder) expressed this idea, saying, “It’s amazing that you can, on your laptop, connect with people from all over the world on Zoom and just be as clear as day. I think about Indigenous people really coming together through those platforms to share their experiences and share their ideas, and then through entrepreneurship really come up with innovative solutions to our issues.”

Challenges with meeting basic needs

Kristen Malecki (University of Illinois Chicago) said that much of the conversation in her room centered on the importance of—and barriers to—meeting basic needs such as food, housing, and health care. Additional stressors discussed include the loss or fragmentation of knowledge around heritage and culture, a loss of connectedness, and environmental concerns.

Many participants emphasized that housing and housing insecurity have become enormous stressors on the community, both around the Denver area and elsewhere. They described how these stressors, in turn, can exacerbate stressors related to access to healthy food and place new burdens on transportation, which is essential for reaching food options, ensuring affordability, and accessing necessary care. Several participants also said that Native communities can face barriers in accessing culturally appropriate care that acknowledges the holistic approach to spiritual, mental, emotional, and physical health found in Native and Tribal cultures, which does not always fit into mainstream methods for health care or mental health care in the United States.

Some participants also highlighted the fading sense of connection with Native cultures and Tribal cultures as a growing stressor, emphasizing the value of people connecting and communicating so that culture does not get lost. “The costs of housing are unbelievable, and Native families have always congregated and lived together; that’s how we survived a lot of the trials and tribulations,” said Beverly Castaneda (Community Elder).

Another participant emphasized the importance of focusing on addressing stressors around youth and education. “Another thing I see being a long-term stressor is the lack of accountability in seeing a change in education for Native American students—that we accept a historical 60 percent dropout rate,” said D.J. Bird Bear (University of Denver).

Community members also highlighted a number of environmental stressors. Climate change is considered to be a major issue, given the connectedness of Native American culture to the environment and the land. Several participants described how climate change is not only contributing

to extreme weather events but is also threatening biodiversity, all of which undermines communities’ ability to be self-sustaining. Some communities also face pollution issues tied to resource extraction, industrial manufacturing, oil production, radiation, and other factors.

Malecki closed her summary with the idea that community and connectedness can be a strength and a stressor, especially amid current uncertainties and growing challenges such as economic and food insecurity. Looking ahead, she highlighted the potential for people to come together to rebuild a sense of community that may have been lost.

Contributors to Community Vulnerability

The challenge of isolation

Andrew Dannenberg (University of Washington, Seattle) said that his room engaged in rich discussions about the factors that make communities more vulnerable to stressors. Isolation emerged as one major theme, and participants focused on two aspects of isolation: whereas Native Americans living on reservations face challenges related to physical isolation and a lack access to the resources and services they need, those living in more urban areas off-reservation can be socially isolated because they are not as connected to each other and maintaining communities is difficult. The isolation experienced by both groups can be compounded by a lack of trust in surrounding systems due to historical trauma.

A related issue is the loss of culture and identity among Native people who move to urban areas. Many experience a disconnection from their Tribal languages, traditions, and cultural practices, making it more difficult to pass them on to future generations. Language plays a particularly important role, because certain ways of thinking, feeling, and doing can only be fully expressed in one’s Native language, several participants said. When forced to shift to English, those expressions can be diminished or lost entirely.

Participants also discussed the impact of systemic inequities rooted in the long history of colonization and the appropriation of Native lands, forced removal of Native peoples, the use of boarding schools to assimilate Native children, and a lack of services. In addition, some participants said that mainstream media tends to represent Native peoples in ways that do not truly reflect their cultures and communities and that do not recognize the differences among different tribes. Participants stressed that much work remains to be done to resolve the systemic inequities that communities face. Intergenerational trauma can also contribute to community vulnerability.

Several participants described how Native communities’ history of physical and cultural separation has also led to a sense of spiritual disconnection, further weakening ties to their traditions and culture. “Something that makes our unique community uniquely vulnerable is a spiritual disconnection,” said Sena Harjo (Seminole, Choctaw and Creek). “Before colonization, we had Tribal methods for health care, mental wellness, community organization, people management, cultural education, all of those pieces. And through colonization, lots of disconnection has happened through boarding schools, through termination, through reservation, through allotments, through relocation, through all of those mechanisms. There is a large population of Tribal folks who have been spiritually disconnected from their homelands [and] home cultures.”

Several participants noted that the long history of broken government promises has fostered

deep mistrust, and several participants added that the cumulative impacts of many small losses, whether of rights or privileges, have added up over time. Finally, in addition to passing down language and culture, some participants noted that passing down land has become a challenge.

The lack of belonging

Cris B. Liban (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority) said that discussions in his room about the factors that make communities vulnerable stressed that urban Native Americans often experience a lack of belonging and seek to understand their Tribal identity and connect with local communities. This idea was expressed, for example, by Beverly Castaneda (Community Elder) who pointed to the spiritual importance of these connections.

Many participants highlighted language loss as a key issue. They also noted that cultural centers can provide important spaces for gathering and support, helping individuals to thrive. Some participants emphasized the importance of culturally grounded programs run by trained Tribal liaisons who can serve effectively in urban settings, although several participants raised questions about the identity and qualifications of these liaisons. Liban also noted that some urban participants voiced a sense of hopelessness, something not echoed by those more familiar with reservation life.

Some participants also described economic challenges, housing insecurity, and the technology divide as contributors to community vulnerability. Given the myriad challenges they face, some community members can feel intimidated or overwhelmed, making them hesitant to seek help. In addition, some participants said that there can be a disconnect between Tribal leadership and the on-the-ground realities in communities. Although the leaders of Tribal Nations may have great intentions for their communities, those intentions are not always realized. Nonprofits have stepped in to offer services, but some participants stated that the effectiveness of nonprofits’ collaboration and coordination with Tribal leaders is unclear.

Finally, many participants noted several areas of confusion and concern around federal regulations. Although certain policies may be standard across the country, their implementation within reservation boundaries can be unclear or inconsistent.

Barriers to Responding to Stressors

Accessing resources

Yoshira Van Horne (University of California, Los Angeles) reported that the conversations in her room highlighted how limited access to resources—and the historical and cultural conditions that have led to this lack of access—undermines the ability for Native communities to respond to stressors.

As one factor, some grants and resources are only available to tribes that are federally recognized or to people living on reservations. Such resources are not always available to Native communities living off-reservation and in more urban areas, who may face similar or distinct challenges, are often excluded from grants, federal funding, and other forms of support.

Another example relates to access to communication and outreach resources. Some participants noted that different communication approaches or technologies may be important to reach

different groups of people; for example, whereas older generations might prefer information in fliers, younger people prefer the Internet, but Internet service is not always available in every community.

The longstanding historical traumas that have affected Native communities have contributed to the barriers that Native people face today. As one example, several participants cited the legacy of Native boarding schools as having a lasting effect on community members. They also discussed the notion of “removal cities” such as Denver, where Native populations were subjected to forced or semi-forced relocation. Some participants cited the lack of services in cities to which Native people were moved; for example, they noted that there is no comprehensive Indian Health Service system or facility serving people who were forcefully relocated to Denver. As a result, a participant noted that a Native person undergoing surgery or giving birth would have to travel 300 miles from Denver to access adequate and culturally responsive health care, which poses a transportation challenge.

In addition, several participants noted that some health care facilities only accept patients who are enrolled members of the tribes they serve, creating another barrier for some patients. Even for those with health care access, insurance co-payments are extremely expensive. Furthermore, even with access to health care and insurance, some participants said that it can be difficult to get appointments and to access care that is culturally responsive.

Barriers related to visibility were also described, with several participants stressing the importance of elevating and integrating Native issues and Native voices into broader conversations, for example, by citing Native scholars on their research about cumulative impacts. Given the history of erasing Native place names and the loss of generational knowledge, several participants said that inclusion of Native knowledge in reports can help to preserve and elevate this information. Another participant explained that Native-led research has helped to draw attention to the ongoing economic impact the legacy of stolen land has on Native people today. Education and sharing of Tribal stories through art, film, and other forms of cultural expression can also play a role in elevating Native voices and raising awareness about important issues among the general, non-Native population, some participants said.

Participants discussed several other approaches to preserving and reclaiming Native cultures and resources. Several participants emphasized the creation of places that communities can truly call their own and noted that improving access to land, such as through efforts such as the Land Back Movement and land trusts, can support physical spaces for Native communities. They also highlighted the care of elders—not only for their well-being but also for preserving and passing down cultural knowledge. Several participants underscored the importance of elevating both youth and elder programs.

Rural, urban, and cross-cutting barriers

Noting that participants in his room discussed many of the barriers already mentioned by other groups, Ivanich focused his report-out on additional issues related to rural settings, Tribal governments, and the urban Native experience, as well as some cross-cutting issues.

Several participants commented that Native Americans living in rural areas can often face limited access to resources, low visibility, and persistent discrimination. In addition, they said that

many Tribal governments struggle to fully exercise their sovereignty in addressing these challenges. High turnover and limited accountability may further hinder effective leadership, undermining communities’ confidence in their ability to take meaningful action. Historical and current policies that erode sovereignty through issues arising from implementation of the Indian Child Welfare Act and a host of other Supreme Court cases add to the problem.

Participants also discussed challenges specific to Native populations living in urban areas such as Denver. One issue is a lack of infrastructure for information sharing, which can lead to misinformation or miscommunication. Capacity building and creating infrastructure can be difficult in urban areas, where people are more mobile and transient, and some participants highlighted a role for strong, visible coalitions in urban areas because people may not know where to go for resources. A participant expressed their surprise that no Tribal coalition to address domestic violence and sexual assault exists in Denver, despite its large Native population. In addition, some participants said that increased racism can heighten fears and risks in more urban settings.

Participants also discussed the effects of colonization, the mixed economy, and environmental change. During the past decade, anthropological work has documented mixed economies—particularly in northern Inuit communities, where subsistence practices remain more common. However, as these communities shift toward mixed economic models, the resultant disruption to cultural values and ways of life is becoming clear, making economic development a complex process. Like other groups, many participants also spoke about the trauma and ripple effects from forced assimilation.

In addition, some participants noted tensions about the topic of national security. Resource extraction, such as mining and power production, often occurs on or near Tribal lands. Although the government tends to focus on protecting those resources from a national security perspective, community members posited that less attention is given to monitoring the people and industries involved in extractive activities to understand how they are operating and whether they are appropriately informing and involving the community in decisions and practices that affect them.

Among the cross-cutting themes, Ivanich highlighted flexible funding. For example, a community may receive funding for a substance use program or water cleanup project, which may intersect when assessing cumulative impacts. Issues such as access to housing and substance misuse persist in Native communities across rural and urban settings and can be linked to some of the barriers that these communities face as well as a disconnect from their culture and traditions.

LOOKING TO THE FUTURE

The workshop’s second session was more future-looking, with breakout sessions focusing on the following questions:

• What is your future vision of improved community health and well-being?
• What are the opportunities to improve decision-making tools by incorporating Tribal knowledge and data?
• What is the most important aspect for our committee to consider?

also raised the possibility of developing a large-scale initiative to elevate and preserve traditional knowledge. They considered how incentives could be used to help spur the co-development of datasets with youth, elders, Tribal colleges and universities, and intertribal groups. In such efforts, community members underscored the importance of on-the-ground researchers who understand not only the nature of the data but also the best ways to collect the data within Native communities, including those in urban environments.

Some participants also emphasized that different Tribes and nations have different needs, and Native Americans who live off-reservation or in urban areas have different needs than those living on reservations. In light of this diversity, some participants cautioned that organizing Native knowledge and data to fit particular questions or structures could potentially dilute the contributions of each nation or group. In addition, there is an important role for datasets from tribes that are not federally recognized.

Regarding this last point, the discussions also touched on the importance of sovereignty and control over how data from Native communities are collected, handled, and shared. Participants discussed opportunities to advance data modernization and access and suggested that FAIR and CARE principles¹ for proper data handling could be followed.

Honoring Tribal ways of knowing

Drawing on the conversations in her room, Habre suggested reframing the question from “What do Tribal leaders and knowledge have to offer?” to “What do the decision makers need to learn from Tribal knowledge?” She posited that this shift would facilitate a move from a defensive posture in which Native people are expected to prove the value of their knowledge to a more cooperative mindset in which decision-makers recognize what they stand to gain through an understanding of Native knowledge.

Community members emphasized the value of preserving and accessing Indigenous knowledge but highlighted some gaps and areas of concern. Some participants provided examples wherein the question of incorporating Tribal knowledge is essentially moot, either because the situation is irreversible or because real change would require something as drastic as a constitutional amendment. For example, some Native lands lie above massive oil reserves, and because of current policies on energy independence and other regulations, some participants believed that it is no longer realistic to expect significant changes in how those lands are managed. However, several participants also suggested that drawing upon deep, longstanding intergenerational knowledge can often be more effective than trying to impose outside solutions or forcing fixes to problems that are not fully understood. In such cases, listening and learning can be better than offering solutions that poorly fit the challenges.

The concept of intergenerational knowledge exchange was viewed as particularly valuable. This concept includes not only seeking to learn from community elders but also giving children an important role to play and a voice in the conversation. “One thing that is important is to continue to have intergenerational spaces,” said Jolene Holgate (Denver Indian Family Resource Center), highlighting the importance of both input from children as well as elder knowledge.

Participants also discussed considerations and concerns around data sovereignty, privacy, and ownership. Addressing these issues is important for protecting knowledge so that it is not misused

___________________

¹ See https://www.gida-global.org/care.

or abused. “On a structural level […] there needs to be a guarantee of data sovereignty and data privacy,” said Spencer Green (County & Tribal Liaison, Colorado).

Throughout the discussion, many participants noted that history has shown that information can be misused, which has made many Native Americans protective of knowledge and information. For this reason, communities have decided to not openly share data in certain cases. In other cases, such as those related to missing and murdered individuals, grassroots movements have had to collect data themselves just to present the data to the federal government as evidence of a serious issue warranting attention. These examples show that the act of giving or receiving data can have very different implications, depending on the context and the ultimate beneficiary.

Finally, several participants said that it is important to educate policymakers about the best ways to approach Native communities and their knowledge keepers and to appropriately recognize and understand the information that they are receiving. Merging cultural knowledge with academic expertise could be a powerful tool. Several participants underscored the need to recognize, respect, and understand the fact that people think differently. They emphasized that Tribal nations should expect that people will listen to them without having to justify why and that people will be respectful in how they use and attempt to understand their data. For example, data does not always have to be quantitative but can also include telling stories and relating experiences, and some participants encouraged welcoming this type of knowledge in the decision-making process.

Key Aspects for the Committee to Consider

Empowering and investing in Native communities

Van Horne noted that mostly non-Indigenous researchers have been performing the data analysis to support cumulative impacts assessment and that their perspectives can skew that work. Therefore, she said it is especially important for the committee to focus on “holding ourselves accountable in our role and recommendations that we ultimately provide so that they are suitable to Native communities from many locations, because they are all very different, have many experiences, and a range of traditions and regions.” She added that a single viewpoint or convening activity will not fully capture or do justice to all of the issues that warrant consideration.

Framing and disseminating information in a way that incorporates Native ways of knowing and being can strengthen the committee’s report, Van Horne said. She added that the discussions in her room underscored the importance of approaching cumulative impacts from a viewpoint of community strengths rather than deficits. Angela Parker (University of Denver) noted that this approach can minimize the risk of framing Native communities within a lens of loss or of lacking competence. Participants emphasized the importance of incorporating local knowledge, autonomy, and leadership, again acknowledging that not every tribe is the same.

Ultimately, it is important to be able to give communities not only recommendations but also the tools and access they can use themselves to lead cumulative impact assessments. This goes hand in hand with preserving Native communities’ sovereignty and their right to their own data. Some participants stressed the importance of not only discussing the technicalities of a cumulative impact assessment but also investing in Native communities so that the solutions come from within their communities rather than from external entities.