1949. Major reasons advanced for the establishment of the area offices were (a) they reflected the Government-wide trend toward decentralization of authority from Washington to field jurisdictions; (b) they permitted centralization of housekeeping functions to a degree which justified, for example, the use of accounting methods not financially supportable at the individual agencies; (c) they made it possible to provide technical personnel to assist agencies, which could not have been financed for each agency individually; and (d) perhaps most importantly, they reduced the number of field personnel reporting to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs from eighty-odd to eleven. It is unfortunate that some of the area offices were established not as "true" area offices but as a combination of an area staff and an agency staff-e. g., Window Rock, Albuquerque, Anadarko, and Muskogee. This combination is not administratively sound and should be discontinued, as recommended later in this report.

The concept of area offices was carefully studied by the survey team, and the conclusions reached are set forth as answers to the following questions:

(a) Should they be continued?

The establishment of area offices was an important improvement in the Bureau's organization and should by all means be retained.

Much of the criticism of the area offices which was investigated arose from delays which occurred, not through fault in the area office but rather out of the nature of the matter concerned-for example, land transactions, etc. The centralizing of housekeeping functions in area offices has in itself been a sound and economical move.

Other criticism of the area form of organization came from within the Bureau and arose from incidents where staff and line functions were not clearly distinguished. Here again the fault is not in the form of organization, but in the proper use of it.

Finally, some opposition to the area office came from community groups who object to them because they no longer have as direct an approach to higher authority as formerly. This condition, however, is one of its advantages. Removal from direct contact permits a clearer separation of line and staff and permits officers in each group to concentrate on their particular functions.

With few exceptions, employees in the field as well as in Washington testified to improved operations resulting from establishment of area offices.

Examples of failure to follow a clear-cut area office procedure are found in those places where area offices are combined with agency offices. Here it is almost impossible to separate line and staff functions. Many of the difficulties found at Window Rock arise from this condition. The area director is handicapped by this dual role and by his proximity to the operating problems which he must face as superintendent.

(b) How many area offices are needed?

The survey team considered the establishment of more area offices, one in each State for example, exploring the idea that such a plan might permit closer working arrangements with State and local governments; however, no evidence was found that such a plan would materially further the objectives of the Bureau.

The factor of distances of agencies from the area offices as now located was considered. While in some cases distances are greater than they should be for close coordination, this situation is not important enough to warrant the establishment of additional offices to serve a few isolated and distant points.

The survey team considered the elimination or consolidation of area offices. The following possible consolidations were rejected:

Billings with Portland

Minneapolis with Aberdeen
Sacramento with Phoenix

Window Rock with Phoenix

In each case the factors of distance, lines of travel and communication, natural similarities and differences of problems, possible effect on public relations, greater efficiency, and economies of operations were considered.

In general it is doubtful that any substantial economies would be realized from any of these mergers or that operating efficiencies would be improved. If the objectives of the Bureau progress in an orderly manner, it will be possible to close several area offices within a few years, but to close or consolidate any of them now might arouse unnecessary political and public opposition and would probably set back the orderly accomplishments of the Bureau objectives rather than further them.

(c) The Window Rock and Albuquerque area offices

In the Window Rock area there are special problems which require major consideration. The chief obstructions to efficient operation here may be stated as follows:

(1) The assignment of one man to the dual role of area director and superintendent is unsound, and practically results in too great a load for one man to carry, in view of the inherent difficulties and size of the operation.

(2) The subordination of the Hopi Reservation to an area director who is also superintendent of the Navahos increases frietion between the tribes.

(3) Housing shortages and limited office space make it necessary to divide staff between Window Rock and six locations in Gallup which makes coordination and supervision difficult.

The survey team, therefore, recommends that the Window Rock area office be moved off the reservation and consolidated with the Albuquerque area office in Albuquerque.

Housing and office space are adequate in Albuquerque. The Albuquerque office presently has a relatively light workload. It is near enough to the reservations to make communications easy.

Although Gallup was considered as a possible location for the combined area office, it is believed that this location would handicap operations because of shortages of housing and office space, and a limited supply of office workers.

The team is convinced that this consolidation would result in substantial savings.

The director of this consolidated office should be one of the strongest administrators in the Bureau with broad knowledge in both staff and line functions.

With the removal of the area office from Window Rock, a strong administrator is needed as Superintendent of the Navahos. He should be given ample authority and power. He should have several subagencies to bring closer contact with the widely scattered and unusually isolated Indian families.

The Hopi Reservation Superintendent should report not to Window Rock but to the Albuquerque office. This Superintendent should likewise be given broad authority to settle questions promptly without constant reference to the area office.

Such an arrangement as here suggested would help solve the so-called Navaho-Hopi problem.

The position of Superintendent of the United Pueblos Agency should be reestablished, distinct from the area director of the Albuquerque area office.

(d) Anadarko and Muskogee area offices (Oklahoma)

The survey team also recommends the consolidation of the two Oklahoma area offices, to be located in the central part of the State The objections and criticisms made of the combined area officeagency organization also apply to the two Oklahoma offices. The team can find no compelling reasons for continuing two area offices in Oklahoma. It is recommended that superintendent positions be reestablished in the two locations where there are now area offices. The consolidation of housekeeping and other functions would result in savings which would more than offset the increased cost of reestablishing the superintendent's positions.

3. The branch form of organization

The survey team considers the division of activities of the Bureau into branches a sound and effective method of distributing the work of the Bureau.

At the area level there is considerable evidence that the branch organization has been carried too far, resulting in some overstaffing. Area directors follow too rigidly the pattern of the standard organization chart. There is a tendency to staff all of the boxes on the chart with technical specialists who handle more operating than staff functions in some particular fields. In many cases this results in too fine a degree of specialization. The work could often be better done by staff generalists who should direct the activities of two or more specialists, particularly where these activities are in related fields.

The survey team therefore recommends the elimination of several of the branches through consolidation of allied functions and at the same time the transfer of some functions to other divisions. In order that there may be consistency throughout the three levels of the organization, these consolidations and changes at the Washington level, the area level, and the superintendents' level are recommended.

The survey team recommends changes resulting in the following branch organizations (changes from present organization are discussed in detail under the appropriate heading of functional activities):

Resources

1. Trust Property (present Branch of Land)

2. Roads

3. Forestry (responsibility for commercial timberlands only) 4. Land Operations (a consolidation of Soil and Moisture Conservation, Extension, Range Management, and Irrigation)

4. Property and Supply (including Building Maintenance) This plan would reduce the number of branches in the Washington office from 17 to 13. At the area offices the number of branches would be reduced from 17 to a maximum of 11. Law and Order and Relocation would be represented in the area office by the assistant area director for community services and not by organized branches.

At the area level it is recommended that the typical organization would include, in addition to the area director, an assistant area director responsible for resources; an assistant area director responsible for community services; and an administrative officer in charge of administration. This would have the advantage of carrying down to the area level the three major divisions of activities found in the Washington office.

At the agency level, the number of branches would be reduced. from 17 to a maximum of 10. The following organization at the agency would include these branches only:

Trust Property

Roads
Forestry

Land Operations

Property and Supply (including Building Maintenance)

Education

Health

Welfare
Placement

Law and Order

In most of the agencies some of these branches would not be necessary and the number could be reduced accordingly.

In the Window Rock Agency, it would be desirable to have the three major divisions as in an area office with an assistant in charge of each.

4. General observations

The plan of organization described above would correct overstaffing, which it is believed is generally found in the area offices and would result in substantial savings.

In general, many staff officers are improperly devoting time to clerical or routine work or work that need not be done. Constant complaints were heard about branch chiefs having to do their own clerical work because typists and stenographers are not available.

Budgeting and reports consume a disproportionate amount of time of staff officers who should be in the field carrying out their staff responsibilities.

The survey team, in concluding this discussion of organizational matters, wishes to call attention to another fact which should be constantly considered by top management: The establishment of area offices removed much work and authority from Washington to the field, bringing line and staff nearer the problems and activities of the agencies. This was a good move. The area-office staff must, however, guard against a detachment that results in failure to be keenly aware of and sensitive to the human needs and problems of the Indian citizen they are duty-bound to serve.

It is important that area offices should be staffed with people having experience at the agency level and that they should keep constantly in touch with the problems of the local communities by continual contact with them. Little evidence was found of failure in this regard. The area people interviewed are generally experienced, wellinformed and competent people, trying to do their best in performing a difficult and sometimes unappreciated task.

C. FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITIES

1. Public relations-Information

(a) Scope of activity

The present Office of Information is composed of three employees in Washington, whose primary duties include the preparing of replies to the more routine and general type of inquiry received by the Bureau and the gathering of material to be used by the Commissioner in speeches and press releases. There are no employees in field offices having this type of activity as their sole responsibility, with the single exception of the Window Rock area office. In that office one employee is responsible for the preparation and dissemination of material regarding the Navaho-Hopi rehabilitation program.

(b) Recommendations

1. The development of an aggressive, well coordinated, public relations, and information program.

Such a program need not involve the establishment of additional positions. Rather there is the need for the designation of responsible officials in the Washington and area offices to handle this activity and to give it increased emphasis.

The survey team has been impressed by the general lack of public understanding of either the objectives of the Bureau's program, or the accomplishments of the Bureau.

Comprehension of Bureau objectives which frequently involves changes reflecting congressional mandate quite often does not extend to the press, to the many organizations voicing and influencing public opinion, and to the Indians themselves.

42367-54