case studies in tribal data collection and use - National Indian Child ...

The plan to spend money in the communities on food and food preparation wasaccepted in only two of the sixteen visits. Ironically, sadly, but also amusingly,the team found itself loading boxes of greasy fast food purchased in Winnipegonto the small plane. These are foods unavailable in most of the communitiesand in none of the fly-in communities. Once again the cash did not flow into thecommunities, but into the profits of a multinational fast food chain. The researchteam had determined to spend the money in the community but the localorganizers and participants wanted something they could not regularly obtain astheir payoff. The tribal council had encountered the request for fast food in thepast and viewed the research team’s compliance with local requestsappropriate. (Hudson & Taylor-Henley, 2001, pp. 97–98)Hudson and Taylor-Henley (2001) point out that although it is important to obtain tribal council approval,it is also important to gauge the nature of the relationship between the tribal councils and localcommunities. Even with tribal council approval, the research team had to work diligently with localcommunities to engage their participation in the research project. Additionally, the research team waschallenged with “if only” responses during focus groups’ discussions on child welfare; in other words,discussion would stop at “‘if only’ the young people would listen to the elders then all would be well. Allwould be similarly well ‘if only’ parents would stop drinking (or going to bingo, etc.)” (p. 102).Researchers had to press respondents to move beyond the “if only’s” in order to come up with triballybased solutions.The final challenge of the community-based model involves the important step of researchers followingup with research results for the American Indian/Alaska Native communities.The report was placed in the hands of the steering committee and the directorsof the child and family service for distribution to the communities. This ended thecontracted responsibilities of the team, but nevertheless left it with some senseof incompleteness … No requests for follow-up briefing or of consultations witheach community were forthcoming, so the debate within the team was whetheror not to offer it—an offer which would likely have been accepted, providingthere were no budgetary implications. In the end the team did nothing. This wasnot so much a result of a principled decision based on the value of noninterferenceor First Nations control, but because funds were depleted, time wasin short supply, and the team had each moved on to other commitments andprojects. (Hudson & Taylor-Henley, 2001, p. 103)This study reported that the researchers applied the culturally appropriate participatory model, but itseems a critical missing feature in their application of the model was the lack of strong communityCase Studies in Tribal Data Collection and UseNational Indian Child Welfare Association24