2015-02-04T15:19:02-06:00 2014-09-30 BKD LLP 111 South Tejon Suite 800 Colorado Springs CO 809039848 990 2013-10-01 840611876 Native American Rights Fund Inc % NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND NATI 3034478760 1506 Broadway Suite Boulder CO 80302 Michael Kennedy Chief Financial Officer 3034478760 2015-02-16 true Rita F Worster CPA P00290681 3034478760 2013 2016-02-25 16:41:14Z John Echohawk 1506 Broadway Boulder CO 80302 7917276 false X WWW.NARF.ORG X 1970 DC CONSTRUCT THE FDNS NECESSARY TO EMPOWER TRIBES SO THEY CAN CONTINUE TO LIVE ACCORDING TO THEIR NATIVE TRADITIONS, ENFORCE THEIR TREATY RIGHTS, & PROTECT THEIR SOVEREIGNTY. 13 13 55 16 0 10173190 4784849 1277395 1306465 336232 559688 21254 28666 11808071 6679668 1708673 1441642 0 0 5029025 5337910 24000 29098 1249301 2610750 3290040 9372448 10098690 2435623 -3419022 20507198 17121075 1419456 1402735 19087742 15718340 X As established by Native American Rights Fund's (NARF) first board of directors, the priorities that guide NARF in its mission to preserve and enforce the status of tribes as sovereign, self-governing bodies still continue to lead NARF today: (1) the preservation of tribal existence; (2) the protection of tribal natural resources; (3) the promotion of human rights; (4) The accountability of governments to Native Americans; and (5) The development of Indian law and educating the public about Indian rights, laws and issues. false false 7598844 1441642 1332589 ESTABLISHED IN 1970, THE NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND (NARF) IS THE OLDEST AND LARGEST NONPROFIT NATIONAL INDIAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATION IN THE COUNTRY DEVOTING ALL ITS EFFORTS TO DEFENDING AND PROMOTING THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF INDIAN PEOPLE ON ISSUES ESSENTIAL TO THEIR TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY, THEIR NATURAL RESOURCES AND THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS. NARF BELIEVES IN EMPOWERING INDIVIDUALS AND COMMUNITIES WHOSE RIGHTS, ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY, AND POLITICAL PARTICIPATION HAVE BEEN SYSTEMICALLY ERODED OR UNDERMINED. NARF CURRENTLY HAS APPROXIMATELY FIFTY ONGOING CASES AND/OR PROJECTS REPRESENTING TRIBES, INDIAN ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS. THE VOLUME AND IMPORTANCE OF THE CASES ON NARF'S DOCKET ILLUSTRATE THE CONTINUING NEED AND DEMAND FOR NARF'S SERVICES. THROUGH NARF'S EFFORTS, ANOTHER $2 MILLION FOR TRIBAL DEPARTMENTS OF EDUCATION HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE 2015 FEDERAL BUDGET. NARF PARTICIPATED IN THE UNITED NATIONS WORLD CONFERENCE ON INDIGENOUS PEOPLES (WCIP) IN SEPTEMBER 2014 IN NEW YORK CITY. A STATEMENT SIGNED ON BY NARF, THE NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS, 72 TRIBES AND OTHER NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS WAS PRESENTED AND ACCEPTED AT THE WCIP. THE STATEMENT HIGHLIGHTED THOSE ISSUES DEEMED MOST IMPORTANT TO BE DEALT WITH AT THE WCIP: 1) ESTABLISHMENT OF A BODY AT THE UNITED NATIONS TO MONITOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES; 2) CREATION OF A PERMANENT, DIGNIFIED AND APPROPRIATE STATUS FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AT THE UNITED NATIONS; 3) ADDRESS VIOLENCE AGAINST INDIGENOUS WOMEN; AND 4) PROTECTIONS OF SACRED SITES. TRIBAL SUPREME COURT PROJECT - THE TRIBAL SUPREME COURT PROJECT IS PART OF THE TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY PROTECTION INITIATIVE AND IS STAFFED BY THE NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS (NCAI) AND NARF. THE PROJECT WAS FORMED IN 2001 IN RESPONSE TO A SERIES OF U.S. SUPREME COURT CASES THAT NEGATIVELY AFFECTED TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY. THE PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT IS TO PROMOTE GREATER COORDINATION AND TO IMPROVE STRATEGY ON LITIGATION THAT MAY AFFECT THE RIGHTS OF ALL INDIAN TRIBES. WE ENCOURAGE INDIAN TRIBES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS TO CONTACT THE PROJECT IN OUR EFFORT TO COORDINATE RESOURCES, DEVELOP STRATEGY AND PREPARE BRIEFS, ESPECIALLY AT THE TIME OF THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, PRIOR TO THE SUPREME COURT ACCEPTING A CASE FOR REVIEW. ON JUNE 30, 2014, THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES HELD ITS LAST CONFERENCE OF THE OCTOBER TERM 2013 ("OT13"), AND ROSE FOR ITS SUMMER RECESS. DURING OT13, 15 PETITIONS FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI WERE FILED IN INDIAN LAW CASES AND CONSIDERED BY THE COURT. ONE PETITION WAS GRANTED (MICHIGAN V. BAY MILLS INDIAN COMMUNITY), TWO PETITIONS WERE DISMISSED (WITHDRAWN VOLUNTARILY) PURSUANT TO SUPREME COURT RULE 46 (MICHIGAN V. SAULT STE. MARIE TRIBE OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS AND MADISON COUNTY V. ONEIDA INDIAN NATION OF NEW YORK), AND 12 PETITIONS WERE DENIED REVIEW BY THE COURT. IN REVIEWING THE 15 PETITIONS FILED, ONE IMPORTANT FACT STANDS OUT: STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WERE PARTIES IN 10 OF THE INDIAN LAW CASES - 5 TIMES AS THE PETITIONER (LOST IN THE LOWER COURT) AND 5 TIMES AS THE RESPONDENT (WON IN THE LOWER COURT). THE UNITED STATES WAS A PARTY IN 3 OF THE INDIAN LAW CASES, ALWAYS AS THE RESPONDENT. THIS HIGH NUMBER OF PETITIONS INVOLVING STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AS A PARTY IS REMARKABLE GIVEN THE LOW NUMBER OF PETITIONS FILED. ON AVERAGE, 25 PETITIONS ARE FILED IN INDIAN LAW CASES EACH TERM (OT11-26 PETITIONS; OT10-26 PETITIONS; OT09-24 PETITIONS; OT08-26 PETITIONS), BUT OVER THE PAST TWO TERMS, THIS NUMBER HAS DECLINED SIGNIFICANTLY (OT13-15 PETITIONS; OT12-14 PETITIONS). ON MAY 27, 2014, IN A STUNNING VICTORY FOR INDIAN TRIBES, THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ISSUED ITS OPINION IN MICHIGAN V. BAY MILLS INDIAN COMMUNITY, REAFFIRMING THE VITALITY OF THE DOCTRINE OF TRIBAL SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY. THE LAWSUIT HAD ITS ORIGIN IN A DISPUTE BETWEEN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN AND THE BAY MILLS INDIAN COMMUNITY OVER WHETHER CERTAIN LANDS CONSTITUTED "INDIAN LANDS" ELIGIBLE FOR GAMING UNDER THE INDIAN GAMING REGULATORY ACT (IGRA), BUT HAD TURNED INTO A MUCH LARGER LEGAL BATTLE OVER THE RIGHTS OF ALL INDIAN TRIBES ACROSS THE COUNTRY. IN A 5-TO-4 DECISION, JUSTICE KAGAN, JOINED BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS, JUSTICES KENNEDY, BREYER AND SOTOMAYOR, AFFIRMED THE DECISION OF THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT WHICH HAD HELD THAT FEDERAL COURTS LACK JURISDICTION TO ADJUDICATE THE STATE'S CLAIMS AGAINST THE BAY MILLS INDIAN COMMUNITY UNDER THE INDIAN GAMING REGULATORY ACT (IGRA)," AND THAT THE CLAIMS ARE BARRED BY THE DOCTRINE OF TRIBAL SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY. IN AN UNEXPECTED DEVELOPMENT, CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS PROVIDED THE CRUCIAL FIFTH VOTE TO SECURE THIS LEGAL VICTORY, HAVING NOT VOTED IN FAVOR OF TRIBAL INTERESTS IN A SINGLE CASE SINCE HE JOINED THE COURT IN 2005. ALASKA NATIVE ISSUES - THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PUBLISHED A FINAL REGULATION REMOVING THE PROHIBITION AGAINST THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR ACQUIRING LANDS IN TRUST STATUS ON BEHALF OF ALASKA NATIVE TRIBES AND ALASKA NATIVE INDIVIDUALS. THE NEW RULE REOPENS A DOOR WHICH HAD BEEN CLOSED TWO DECADES AGO WHEN A DEPARTMENT LAWYER INCORRECTLY CONCLUDED THAT A 1971 LAW HAD REPEALED THE SECRETARY'S AUTHORITY TO PROTECT ALASKA NATIVE TRIBAL AND INDIVIDUAL LANDS. THIS ACTION COMES IN DIRECT RESPONSE TO LITIGATION BROUGHT BY THE NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND TO OVERTURN THAT ILLEGAL LIMITATION ON THE ABILITY OF THE SECRETARY TO PROTECT ALASKA NATIVE LANDS. NARF CHALLENGED THE PROHIBITION IN A 2006 LAW SUIT, AKIACHAK NATIVE COMMUNITY, ET AL. V. SALAZAR, BROUGHT AGAINST THE SECRETARY ON BEHALF OF FOUR TRIBES AND ONE NATIVE INDIVIDUAL-THE AKIACHAK NATIVE COMMUNITY, CHALKYITSIK VILLAGE, THE CHILKOOT INDIAN ASSOCIATION, THE TULUKSAK NATIVE COMMUNITY, AND ALICE KAVAIRLOOK. WORKING WITH THE ALASKA LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION, NARF CHALLENGED A REGULATION FOUND AT 25 C.F.R. 151.1 WHICH GENERALLY BARRED THE SECRETARY FROM ACQUIRING LANDS IN TRUST STATUS (OTHER THAN FOR THE METLAKATLA INDIAN COMMUNITY). NARF ARGUED THAT THIS DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT OF ALASKA NATIVE TRIBES VIOLATED A STATUTORY RULE SET FORTH IN THE INDIAN REORGANIZATION ACT NULLIFYING FEDERAL REGULATIONS THAT DISCRIMINATE AMONG NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES. THE STATE OF ALASKA INTERVENED IN THE LONGSTANDING CASE TO ARGUE THAT THIS DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT WAS REQUIRED BY THE ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT, BUT THE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REJECTED THAT POSITION AND AGREED WITH NARF AND THE TRIBES ON ALL COUNTS. IT IS THAT COURT DECISION WHICH LAID THE GROUNDWORK FOR THE FINAL RULE. NARF BROUGHT A LAWSUIT TO ENFORCE SECTION 203 OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT IN 2007 CALLED NICK V. BETHEL. THE PLAINTIFFS WERE FOUR TRIBAL COUNCILS AND FOUR INDIVIDUAL ELDERS IN THE BETHEL CENSUS AREA. A HUGE SWATH OF ALASKA IS NOT ORGANIZED INTO ANY BOROUGHS OR COUNTIES SO THE CENSUS HAD MADE ITS COVERAGE DETERMINATIONS BASED ON FEDERAL CENSUS AREAS. IN THE BETHEL CENSUS AREA, THE FIRST LANGUAGE SPOKEN IN 75 PERCENT OF HOMES WAS YUP'IK AND THE ILLITERACY RATE WAS 17 TIMES THE NATIONAL AVERAGE. NARF WON A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION IN JULY 2008 MANDATING RELIEF FOR THE 2008 ELECTION CYCLE, INCLUDING SAMPLE BALLOTS WRITTEN IN YUP'IK. THE CASE WAS SETTLED IN JANUARY 2010 WHEN THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF ELECTIONS (DOE) AGREED TO PROVIDE SOME ELECTION MATERIALS IN YUP'IK AS WELL AS PROVIDE INCREASED TRAINING FOR POLL WORKERS, AMONG OTHER RELIEF. BECAUSE THE CENSUS AREAS ABOVE AND BELOW BETHEL, THE WADE HAMPTON AND DILLINGHAM CENSUS AREAS RESPECTIVELY, SPOKE THE SAME LANGUAGE AND HAD NEARLY IDENTICAL STATISTICS AND NEEDS, THE NICK PLAINTIFFS ASSUMED THAT THE SAME RELIEF WOULD BE AFFORDED TO THEM EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE NOT IN THE ACTUAL LAWSUIT. BEGINNING WITH THE 2012 ELECTION CYCLE, NARF BEGAN TO RECEIVE COMPLAINTS FROM THE ADJACENT WADE HAMPTON AND DILLINGHAM CENSUS AREAS THAT THEY WERE RECEIVING NONE OF THE BENEFITS FROM THE NICK CASE AND INDEED ALMOST NO LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE AT ALL. IN FACT, THE DOE APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTING SAMPLE BALLOTS IN YUP'IK IN ALL THREE CENSUS AREAS, BUT RESTRICTING ALL OTHER YUP'IK ELECTION MATERIALS TO THE BETHEL CENSUS AREA. NARF SUED THE DOE AGAIN IN JULY 2013. THIS TIME THE PLAINTIFFS FROM THE ADJACENT CENSUS AREAS ADDED FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEEN AMENDMENT CLAIMS UNDER THE U.S. CONSTITUTION BECAUSE IF YOU KNOW THERE ARE LANGUAGE PROBLEMS AND YOU HAVE MATERIALS YOU USE ELSEWHERE BUT REFUSE TO PROVIDE, YOU ARE DISCRIMINATING. THIS SECOND CASE, CALLED TOYUKAK V. TREADWELL, DID SOMETHING VERY UNUSUAL FOR A SECTION 203 CASE: IT WENT ALL THE WAY THROUGH TRIAL. THIS IS NOT VERY COMMON FOR CASES BROUGHT UNDER THIS LAW BECAUSE JURISDICTIONS USUALLY DO NOT FIGHT THEIR VOTERS ON SOMETHING SO SIMPLE ALL THE WAY TO THE BITTER END. IT IS ALSO GENERALLY EASY TO PROVE SECTION 203 CASES IN THAT THE EVIDENCE CONSISTS OF THE MATERIALS MADE AVAILABLE IN ENGLISH AND THE MATERIALS MADE AVAILABLE IN THE RELEVANT LANGUAGE. IF THEY DO NOT MATCH ONE TO O 389780 0 677 NATIONAL INDIAN LAW LIBRARY (NILL): NILL HELPS FULFILL NARF'S FIFTH PRIORITY, THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIAN LAW AND EDUCATING THE PUBLIC BY: PROVIDING, FREE TO THE PUBLIC, UPDATES ON INDIAN LAW, RESEARCH ASSISTANCE AND DOCUMENT DELIVERY, AND UNIQUE AND VALUABLE RESOURCES ON ITS WEB SITE. IN ADDITION, NILL PROVIDES RESEARCH AND INFORMATION SUPPORT TO NARF SO THAT IT CAN CARRY OUT ITS OTHER FOUR PRIORITIES AND OPERATE IN A COST-EFFECTIVE MANNER. WITH MORE THAN 400 PARTICIPATING TRIBES, NARF'S NATIONAL INDIAN LAW LIBRARY (NILL) COMPREHENSIVE TRIBAL LAW INDEX COLLECTION OF TRIBAL LAWS CONTINUES TO GROW. WEB USE STATISTICS SHOW THAT THE ONLINE TRIBAL LAW COLLECTION IS SEEING MORE VISITORS, WITH ABOUT 8,000 PAGE VISITS PER MONTH. TO ACCOMMODATE THIS GROWTH AND INCREASE USABILITY, NILL HAS DEVELOPED AN IMPROVED ARCHITECTURE FOR THE ONLINE TRIBAL LAW COLLECTION. THE NEW TRIBAL LAW GATEWAY WAS RELEASED IN AUGUST, 2012 AND AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2014 MORE THAN 400 INDIVIDUAL TRIBE'S PAGES HAVE BEEN LAUNCHED. WE PLAN TO ROLL OUT ALL OF THE REMAINING TRIBAL PAGES OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS. EACH TRIBE WILL HAVE A WEB PAGE OUTLINING EXACTLY WHAT TRIBAL LAW MATERIALS - FROM CODES AND CONSTITUTIONS TO TRIBAL COURT OPINIONS - ARE AVAILABLE AND WHERE THEY CAN BE FOUND. NILL IS ALSO ORGANIZING SEVERAL FREE WEBINARS ON INDIAN LAW RESEARCH WITH THE FIRST PROVIDED FOR THE OREGON BAR ASSOCIATION. THE PURPOSE OF THESE WEBINARS IS TO PROVIDE PRACTICAL GUIDANCE ON HOW TO RESEARCH TRIBAL LAW - A DIFFICULT AND MISUNDERSTOOD AREA OF LAW. THE LIBRARY PLANS TO PROVIDE AT LEAST 3 FREE SESSIONS AVAILABLE TO MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL NATIVE AMERICAN BAR, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF LAW LIBRARIES AND TRIBAL MEMBERS/GOVERNMENTS. THE PURPOSE OF THESE SESSIONS IS TO HELP THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND HOW TO UTILIZE THE FREE NILL RESEARCH TOOLS AND SERVICES AS WELL AS UNDERSTAND WHICH FEE-BASED SERVICES ALSO PROVIDE QUALITY CONTENT. TRIBAL LAW IS A GROWING AREA OF LAW AS TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS EXERCISE THEIR INHERENT JURISDICTION AND DEVELOP THEIR LAW IN A WAY THAT MEETS AND HONORS THEIR TRADITIONAL AND CUSTOMARY WAYS OF LIFE. 7988624 true true false true false false false true false true true true false false true false true false false false false false false true false false false true false true false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false true 63 0 true 55 true false false false false false false false false false false X 13 13 false false false false false false false true true false false true true true true true true true true false AL AK AR CA CO CT FL GA HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD MA MI MN MS MO NH NJ NM NY NC ND OH OK OR PA RI SC TN TX UT VT VA WA WV WI X X NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND 3034478760 1506 BROADWAY BOULDER CO 80302 X GERALD DANFORTH CHAIRMAN 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 NATASHA V SINGH VICE-CHAIRMAN 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 VIRGINIA CROSS BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 BARBARA SMITH BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 MARK MACARRO BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 BUFORD L ROLIN BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 MOSES K N HAIA III BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 JULIE ROBERTS-HYSLOP BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 GARY HAYES BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 STEPHEN R LEWIS BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 PETER M PINO BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 TEX G HALL BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 LARRY OLINGER BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 ROBERT MCGHEE BOARD MEMBER 1.0 0.0 X 0 0 0 JOHN ECHOHAWK EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 40.0 X 202343 0 36909 MICHAEL KENNEDY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 40.0 0.0 X 114898 0 25544 RAY RAMIREZ CORPORATE SECRETARY 40.0 0.0 X 85528 0 16133 MORGAN O'BRIEN DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 40.0 0.0 X 111874 0 35482 MELODY MCCOY LITIGATION MGMT COMMITTEE 40.0 0.0 X 169203 0 43599 KIM GOTTSCHALK LITIGATION MGMT COMMITTEE 40.0 0.0 X 174759 0 32761 NATALIE LANDRETH LITIGATION MGMT COMMITTEE 40.0 0.0 X 135628 0 24356 DON WHARTON ATTORNEY 40.0 0.0 X 172102 0 28997 STEVEN MOORE ATTORNEY 40.0 0.0 X 167203 0 47844 HEATHER KENDALL ATTORNEY 40.0 0.0 X 167514 0 31486 RICHARD GUEST ATTORNEY 40.0 0.0 X 151460 0 39106 SUSAN NOE ATTORNEY 40.0 0.0 X 168014 0 13055 1820526 0 375272 16 false true false Rosenfeld Consultant Services PO Box 13 HOMER AK 99603 Enviromental Work 104531 1 X 47245 2924573 1813031 4784849 LEGAL FEES 900099 1306465 1306465 1306465 228049 228049 0 1865 1865 0 0 0 1569247 1237608 331639 331639 331639 0 0 0 REIMBURSEMENTS 900099 5756 5756 HONORARIUMS 900099 700 700 NARF PUBLICATION 900099 677 677 19668 19668 26801 6679668 1333266 561553 X 1441642 1441642 0 0 0 1228286 784447 256960 186879 0 3122652 2573052 287469 262131 169537 123920 34036 11581 541916 448623 17923 75370 275519 202440 29577 43502 0 0 26000 26000 15744 15744 29098 29098 45344 45344 1040632 1040632 28533 28533 544598 280102 55929 208567 103997 61361 8904 33732 0 341463 311931 18714 10818 666507 527121 69111 70275 0 29253 13160 238 15855 4976 4976 0 46634 36890 3975 5769 23211 21150 1298 763 DIRECT MARKET MAILINGS 265502 265502 LIBRARY 44718 43481 311 926 COSTS RELATED TO LEGAL CASES 62928 62928 10098690 7988624 860765 1249301 X 348617 1217972 5615830 2568736 4304527 1558305 573605 432867 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 125717 136038 1248406 982975 218605 265431 4790738 5462835 4524101 5413635 0 0 0 47500 5458 17756 20507198 17121075 1082335 1019009 0 0 7532 15979 0 0 0 0 0 0 47832 82551 0 0 281757 285196 1419456 1402735 X 13711924 13208792 4405696 1527132 970122 982416 19087742 15718340 20507198 17121075 -3419022 49620 X false true X true true true X 4883293 4958526 16104389 10173190 4784849 40904247 0 0 4883293 4958526 16104389 10173190 4784849 40904247 1645170 39259077 99457 71125 66899 119853 229914 587248 0 0 41491495 7273970 0.94620 0.94342 X RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED 0 16396 16396 10082294 10098690 654935 163734 452555 526667 618622 654935 2252779 3379169 52100 47600 46681 16396 162777 113139 131667 154656 163734 563196 844794 0 2984 4951 0 7935 X X ASSIST IN RESEARCH - CLIENT CASES false 5375818 951052 3817322 2509548 4359715 3430514 2594411 5195818 1768590 3627190 856065 4539715 2404013 649850 1285273 1768590 985392 1706805 288184 2404013 0.00000 0.39150 0.60850 false false 58937 58937 80000 80000 0 760097 633866 126231 349372 269109 80263 265431 HEDGE FUND 3913635 F LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 1500000 F 5413635 0 RETIREMENT OBLIGATION 285196 285196 6729288 49620 49620 6679668 6679668 10098690 10098690 10098690 IF ELECTED UNDER SFAS 116 PROVIDE FOOTNOTE FROM FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PART III, LINE 1A COLLECTIONS OF WORKS OF ART, HISTORICAL TREASURES, AND SIMILAR ASSETS ARE NOT CAPITALIZED IN AS MUCH AS THE ITEMS ARE PRESERVED AND CARED FOR CONTINUOUSLY. PURCHASES OF COLLECTION ITEMS ARE REPORTED IN THE YEAR OF ACQUISITION AS DECREASES IN UNRESTRICTED NET ASSETS, OR IN TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY RESTRICTED NET ASSETS IF THE ASSETS USED TO PURCHASE THE ITEMS WERE RESTRICTED TO THAT USE BY DONOR STIPULATION. CONTRIBUTIONS OF COLLECTION ITEMS ARE NOT REPORTED IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. PROCEEDS FROM DISPOSAL OF AND INSURANCE RECOVERIES RELATED TO COLLECTION ITEMS ARE REPORTED AS INCREASES IN THE APPROPRIATE NET ASSET CLASSES. NARF'S COLLECTIONS CONSIST OF RARE BOOKS AND MAPS. THESE COLLECTIONS ARE HELD FOR EDUCATIONAL AND RESEARCH PURPOSES. THEY ARE SUBJECT TO A POLICY THAT REQUIRES PROCEEDS FROM THE DISPOSITION OF COLLECTION ITEMS TO BE USED TO ACQUIRE OTHER COLLECTION ITEMS. DESCRIPTION OF COLLECTIONS AND HOW THEY FURTHER THE EXEMPT PURPOSE PART III, LINE 4 COLLECTIONS CONSIST OF RARE BOOKS AND MAPS. THESE COLLECTIONS ARE HELD FOR EDUCATIONAL AND RESEARCH PURPOSES, WHICH ARE USED IN TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND EDUCATING THE PUBLIC ABOUT INDIAN RIGHTS, LAWS, AND ISSUES. DESCRIBE THE INTENDED USES OF THE ORGANIZATION'S ENDOWMENT FUNDS PART V, LINE 4 THE ENDOWMENT ASSETS INCLUDE ONLY DONOR-RESTRICTED ENDOWMENT FUNDS HELD IN PERPETUITY OR FOR DONOR-SPECIFIED PERIODS. RETURNS GENERATED BY THE ENDOWMENT ASSETS ARE UNRESTRICTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH DONOR STIPULATIONS AND ARE USED TO SUPPORT PROGRAMS AND SUPPORTING OPERATIONS. UNCERTAIN TAX POSITIONS PART X, LINE 2 MANAGEMENT HAS EVALUATED THEIR INCOME TAX POSITIONS UNDER THE GUIDANCE INCLUDED IN ASC 740. BASED ON THEIR REVIEW, MANAGEMENT HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY MATERIAL UNCERTAIN TAX POSITIONS TO BE RECORDED OR DISCLOSED IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. X X X X X X true BRICKMILL MARKETING SERVICES DIRECT MAIL false 747628 24000 723628 PUBLIC OUTREACH FUNDRAISING LLC TELEMARKET false 0 5098 0 747628 29098 723628 All States FUNDRAISING Schedule G, Part I PAYMENTS FOR PRODUCTION EXPENSES (SUCH AS PRINTING AND POSTAGE) TO BRICKMILL MARKETING SERVICES WERE MADE SEPARATELY FROM FUNDRAISING FEES. TOTAL PRODUCTION EXPENSES AMOUNTED TO $265,502 FOR THE YEAR. true ALASKA LEGAL SERVICES 1016 W 6TH AVE ANCHORAGE AK 99501 920034754 501(C)(3) 13317 ANISHINABE LEGAL SERVICES PO BOX 157 CASS LAKE MN 56633 410960032 501(C)(3) 46623 CALIFORNIA INDIAN LEGAL SERVICES 609 S ESCONDIDO BLVD ESCONDIDO CA 86515 941676390 501(C)(3) 121141 COLORADO LEGAL SERVICES INC 835 E 2ND AVE 300 DURANGO CO 81301 840402702 501(C)(3) 15919 DAKOTA PLAINS LEGAL SERVICES PO BOX 727 MISSION SD 57555 460310828 501(C)(3) 78454 DNA PEOPLE'S LEGAL SERVICES PO BOX 306 WINDOW ROCK AZ 86515 860207220 501(C)(3) 171844 IDAHO LEGAL AID SERVICES INC 310 N 5TH ST BOISE ID 83702 820293641 501(C)(3) 68255 LEGAL AID OF NORTH CAROLINA SYLVA OFFICE PO BOX 426 SYLVA NC 28779 311784161 501(C)(3) 28122 LEGAL AID OF WYOMING 211 W 19TH ST STE 300 CHEYENNE WY 82001 830222545 501(C)(3) 44922 LEGAL ASSISTANCE OF NORTH DAKOTA PO BOX 1893 BISMARCK ND 58502 450336235 501(C)(3) 60670 MICHIGAN INDIAN LEGAL SERVICES 814 S GARFIELD AVE TRAVERSE CITY MI 49686 382077208 501(C)(3) 60320 MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAW LEGAL DEFENSE PO BOX 6255 CHOCTAW MS 39350 640345731 GOV'T ORG 53735 MONTANA LEGAL SERVICES 616 HELENA AVE STE 100 HELENA MT 59601 810298262 501(C)(3) 63578 NEBRASKA LEGAL SERVICES 1904 FARNAM ST STE 500 OMAHA NE 68102 470483506 501(C)(3) 43710 NEVADA LEGAL SERVICES 530 S 6TH ST LAS VEGAS NV 89101 880176914 501(C)(3) 66113 NEW MEXICO LEGAL AID PO BOX 25486 ALBUQUERQUE NM 87125 850116950 501(C)(3) 79094 NORTHWEST JUSTICE PROJECT 401 2ND AVE SOUTH SEATTLE WA 98104 911687791 501(C)(3) 22432 OKLAHOMA INDIAN LEGAL SERVICES 4200 PERIMETER CTR OKLAHOMA CITY OK 73112 731142462 501(C)(3) 78501 OREGON LEGAL AID SERVICESNA PROGRAM 1827 NE 44TH AVE PORTLAND OR 87213 830635480 501(C)(3) 14432 PINE TREE LEGAL ASSISTANCE PO BOX 547 PORTLAND ME 04112 010279387 501(C)(3) 54940 SOUTHERN ARIZONA LEGAL AID 2343 E BRADWAY BLVD TUCSON AZ 85719 860143449 501(C)(3) 87716 TEXAS RIOGRANDE LEGAL AID 300 S TEXAS BLVD WESLACO TX 78596 741675230 501(C)(3) 62988 UTAH LEGAL SERVICES 205 NORTH 400 WEST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103 870298910 501(C)(3) 46800 WISCONSIN JUDICAREINDIAN LAW OFFICE PO BOX 6100 WAUSAU WI 54402 391170880 501(C)(3) 58016 24 SCHEDULE I, PART I, LINE 2 PROCEDURES FOR MONITORING THE USE OF GRANT FUNDS ORGANIZATIONS ARE SUBCONTRACTORS RELATED TO THE FUNDING FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS FOR TRIBAL CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS. MONITORING INCLUDES: THOROUGH REVIEW OF PERFORMANCE AND EXPENDITURES SUBJECT TO STRICT TERMS, CONDITIONS, AND SPECIFICATIONS, INCLUDING QUARTERLY REPORTING AND AUDITING REQUIREMENTS AND PERIODIC SITE VISITS. X X X false false false false false false false false false JOHN ECHOHAWK EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 201390 0 0 0 953 0 13886 0 23023 0 239252 0 0 0 MELODY MCCOY LITIGATION MGMT COMMITTEE 169030 0 0 0 173 0 12420 0 31179 0 212802 0 0 0 KIM GOTTSCHALK LITIGATION MGMT COMMITTEE 173806 0 0 0 953 0 12107 0 20654 0 207520 0 0 0 NATALIE LANDRETH LITIGATION MGMT COMMITTEE 135553 0 0 0 75 0 7715 0 16641 0 159984 0 0 0 DON WHARTON ATTORNEY 170557 0 0 0 1545 0 16381 0 12616 0 201099 0 0 0 STEVEN MOORE ATTORNEY 166708 0 0 0 495 0 18322 0 29522 0 215047 0 0 0 HEATHER KENDALL ATTORNEY 167191 0 0 0 323 0 11554 0 19932 0 199000 0 0 0 RICHARD GUEST ATTORNEY 151319 0 0 0 141 0 8950 0 30156 0 190566 0 0 0 SUSAN NOE ATTORNEY 167864 0 0 0 150 0 3159 0 9896 0 181069 0 0 0 PROCESS TO REVIEW THE FORM 990 FORM 990, PART VI, QUESTION 11B THE FORM 990 IS PREPARED BY THIRD PARTY PREPARERS. THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER THOROUGHLY REVIEWS THE FORM 990 AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ARE PROVIDED WITH COPIES OF THE FORM 990 PRIOR TO FILING WITH THE IRS. PROCESS FOR MONITORING COMPLIANCE WITH CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY FORM 990, PART VI, QUESTION 12C BOARD OF DIRECTORS, OFFICERS, SUPERVISORS, AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL STAFF ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ANNUALLY (BY JANUARY 15 OF EACH YEAR). DISCLOSURE AND DETERMINATION OF THE POTENTIAL CONFLECT OF INTEREST (PCI) AT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS LEVEL ARE DISCLOSED TO THE BOARD CHAIR (IF THE BOARD CHAIR IS THE ONE WITH PCI, THEN TO THE VICE-CHAIR), WHICH IS THEN BROUGHT TO THE FULL BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION AND DETERMINATION. BOARD MEMBERS WITH PCI SHALL BE ABSENT FROM THE BOARD'S DISCUSSION AND DECISION. EMPLOYEES WITH PCI SHALL GO TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ED) (IF ED HAS A PCI, THEN TO THE BOARD CHAIR). THE MATTER WILL THEN GO TO CORPORATE OFFICERS FOR CONSIDERATION AND DETERMINATION. REVIEW OF CEO OR TOP MGMT OFFICIAL COMPENSATION FORM 990, PART VI, QUESTION 15A & 15B AN EXTENSIVE SALARY SURVEY IS PERFORMED FOR ALL POSITIONS IN THE SUMMER OF EVERY EVEN YEAR IN WHICH CURRENT SALARIES ARE COMPARED TO MARKET SURVEY DATA OBTAINED FROM A VARIETY OF PROFESSIONAL SURVEY SOURCES. THIS INFORMATION IS THEN SUBMITTED TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR REVIEW AND THEN DISCUSSED AND APPROVED DURING A REGULARLY SCHEDULED EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING. MINUTES OF THE MEETING ARE TAKEN FOR SUBSTANTIATION OF THE DELIBERATION AND DECISION. THIS PROCEDURE WAS LAST PERFORMED IN 2014. EXPLAN WHY 1023/1024, 990, OR 990-T IS NOT AVAILABLE TO PUBLIC FORM 990, PART VI, QUESTION 18 FORM 1023 WAS FILED BEFORE JULY 15, 1987 AND A COPY WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THAT TIME. DESCRIBE HOW DOCUMENTS ARE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC Form 990, Part VI, Question 19 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ARE AVAILABLE ON OUR WEBSITE AND UPON REQUEST. REQUESTS (WITH A VALID BUSINESS PURPOSE) FOR THE MANAGING DOCUMENTS AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY WILL BE CONSIDERED. GOVERNMENT GRANTS FORM 990, PART VIII, LINE 1(E) THE AMOUNT SHOWN AS GOVERNMENT GRANTS ON LINE 1(E) INCLUDES $1,456,744 OF CONTRIBUTION REVENUE FROM APPROXIMATELY 25 TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS. FORM 990 PART IX LINE 11G DESCRIPTION:EXPERT/CONSULTING FEES TOTAL FEES:1040632