Fulfilling the hope of ICWA: The role of community context Susan Quash-Mah a, ⁎ ,1 , Jean Stockard b , Deborah Johnson-Shelton c , Ryann Crowley c a Teamwork for Children, 805 Brookline Drive, Eugene, OR, United States b University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, United States c Oregon Research Institute, 1415 Franklin Blvd., Eugene, OR 97403, United States abstract article info Article history: Received 9 November 2009 Received in revised form 17 February 2010 Accepted 20 February 2010 Available online 25 February 2010 Keywords: ICWA Adoption Permanency Foster care Administrative data This paper suggests that long-term foster care, especially when it is provided within an American Indian Cultural Environment (AICE), may be a culturally-appropriate alternative form of permanency for American Indian children. Administrative data on foster care placements of children from four California counties over a five-year period indicate that children in the county with the strongest AICE had fewer placements and placements that were, on average, significantly longer. Within counties that had recognized tribes, children from local tribes had longer placements. Data on individual placements were available for one county and indicated that children whose home tribes were within that county and who were placed on Rancherias had significantly longer placements than other children. These relationships remained significant when children's demographic characteristics were controlled. Implications for policy and practice related to ICWA are discussed. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction American Indian tribes and communities historically relied on customary practice and tradition to provide for the needs of their children through extended family relationships. Prior to the intervention of child welfare laws and practices beginning in the late 1800s (Downs, Moore, & McFadden, 2009; Martin, 2007; Mason, 1994), American Indian children who were in need of a safe, loving place to live and could not stay with their birth parents would temporarily or permanently live with an extended family member (a relative—aunt, uncle, grandparent, for example—or with a member of the tribe or community who was part of the same clan, for those tribes where the clan system was practiced). Children within most Indian customary tribal practices are considered gifts and their welfare is the concern of the entire community (NICWA, 2005). Children also represent a connection between the past and the future for the entire tribe or community, not just the immediate or birth family. In honor of and respect for extended family relationships, children historically were and to the present are often reared by one or more extended family members. At about the same time as child welfare issues began to be legislated and their implementation re-located from families and communities into the legal system, many American Indian children were involuntarily removed from their homes and placed in boarding schools. The goal of the boarding schools—funded by the federal government and most run by charitable organizations with the full sanction of the federal government—was to Americanize the Indian based on the concept of “Kill the Indian in him, and save the man” (Bender, Brown, & Rosenzweig, 2005). The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) was passed in 1978 after the last of the boarding schools were closed in the 1970s to begin to address the ongoing practice of removing Indian children from their homes and placing them with non-Indian families. Although many boarding schools were closed by the late 1930s, the ongoing practice of removing children from their families and communities continued until the passage of ICWA; and, in some measure, continues to the present. With this historical context in mind, ICWA's proponents sought to address the very disproportionate number of Indian children in foster care and the vast preponderance of them being placed with non-Indian families (Hogan & Siu, 1988). By returning authority over their children who were involved in custody cases to tribes (excluding those involving divorce), ICWA was established to help maintain—and in some cases reestablish—ties between Indian children and their tribal communities, practices, and heritage. To bring this about, ICWA specifically requires that Indian children who are removed from their parents because of abuse or neglect be placed first with extended family and, if that is not possible, then with other tribal members, followed by other Indians who are not members of their tribe and then, only as the last option, with non-Indian foster or permanent parents. The ICWA (federal law 25 U.S.C. § 1902, enacted in 1978 and revised in 2003) also explicitly gives the tribe a voice in the Children and Youth Services Review 32 (2010) 896–901 ⁎ Corresponding author. The Polished Word, LLC, 3835 Watkins Lane, Eugene, OR 97405, United States. Tel./fax: + 1 541 345 9612. E-mail addresses: rrpic@qwestoffice.net, polishedword@qwestoffice.net (S. Quash-Mah), jeans@uoregon.edu (J. Stockard), debj@ori.org (D. Johnson-Shelton), ryannc@ori.org (R. Crowley). 1 Permanent address: The Polished Word, LLC, 3835 Watkins Lane, Eugene, OR 97405, United States. 0190-7409/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.02.011 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Children and Youth Services Review journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth