Research has found that colonization leads to historical, intergenerational, and cultural trauma in Indigenous people through the buildup of cumulative stress that is passed down from generation to generation. Epigenetic research has even found changes in the DNA of each new generation, which is believed to also play a role in passing down trauma. This trauma negatively impacts Indigenous community, family, and individual well-being and results in the many deficit-oriented outcomes commonly focused on in behavioral, physical, social, mental, and relational health research. While many approaches use these deficit statistics to label and define Indigenous communities, we at Child Trends discuss these as current community conditions, which are of the present and able to be overcome. We situate Indigenous well-being within this broader context to highlight how present-day statistics and indicators typically used to monitor the health, well-being, and success of individuals and communities are a result of colonization and ongoing policies.

This discussion of colonization can also help those working with Indigenous populations understand the importance of conducting research “in a good way” without further traumatizing communities. There is a long history of research abuses that have harmed—and continue to harm—Indigenous communities. Research abuses have occurred when researchers or organizations ignore Indigenous sovereignty and self-determination (e.g., they do not seek free, prior, and informed consent) and ignore data sovereignty (e.g., they take data or samples without appropriate consent; do not return data, samples, and/or results). Other research abuses have included emphasizing community deficits or blaming deficits on the community through misrepresentation of data and stereotyping Indigenous populations. These abuses also foster mistrust, which presents a barrier for conducting beneficial research and evaluation that could strengthen well-being. In the next section, we explain an aspect of ongoing colonization—U.S. Federal Indian Law—and how it could be changed and improved.

Key statutes, case law, and policies impacting Indigenous health and well-being

Indigenous children, youth, family, and community well-being is intricately tied to policies that either harm or support well-being (visit this link to see our extensive exploration of U.S. federal policies and their impacts). Below, we mention and briefly explain a few examples of federal and international policies. The first list gives examples of Federal Indian Law that negatively impact Indigenous Peoples’ well-being. The second list gives examples of Federal Indian Law that have the potential to positively impact Indigenous well-being. In the United States, some of the most problematic aspects of Federal Indian Law are based on decisions made over 100 years ago. These historic decisions have set precedent and have not been overturned or rewritten, so continue to cause harm. Additionally, the United States has continued to underfund programs for Indigenous communities and break signed treaties, creating many adverse current community conditions.

Examples of statutes, laws, and policies with negative impacts on well-being:

• Johnson v. McIntosh in 1823 took Indigenous lands through the Doctrine of Discovery and limited which entities Tribes could sell or cede land to (only the federal government).
• Cherokee Nation v. Georgia in 1831 characterized Tribes as “domestic dependent nations” related to the United States as “a ward to his guardian.”
• United States v. Kagama in 1886 gave the U.S. Congress plenary power to extinguish Tribal sovereignty and federal recognition at any time.
• Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta in 2022 asserted a presumption of state criminal jurisdiction that must be preempted in Indian Country/reservations (trust lands held by the U.S. government), undermining Tribal sovereignty and threatening the safety of people in Indigenous communities.
• Blood quantum was originated by the U.S. government in the 1700s to dispossess Indigenous Peoples from their lands. It racialized Indigenous Peoples based on their skin color and categorized them by their amount of “Indian” blood, in hopes of eventually extinguishing them through assimilation. This practice continues today, as American Indian and Alaska Native people in the United States are issued a Certificate of Degree of Indian Blood (CDIB) card from the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA).
• Most funding for states through the U.S. federal government is noncompetitive, meaning that all states receive it. However, Tribes often have to compete for this funding, pitting them against one another for resources important for serving Indigenous children, youth, and families.

Examples of statutes, laws, and policies with potential positive impacts on well-being:

• Health care is a treaty right, guaranteed to American Indian and Alaska Native people in exchange for millions of acres of lands that now make up the United States. Federal responsibility for American Indian and Alaska Native health care was further codified in the Snyder Act of 1921 and the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA) of 1976 (later reauthorized), which together form the legislative authority for the federal Indian Health Service (IHS). The IHS is currently gravely underfunded (less funding than Medicaid and Medicare per person), with severely limited access to services for the large proportion of Indigenous people living in urban areas. Indigenous leaders have called for expanded health care funding and facilities to improve the health of Indigenous people.
• The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) of 1978 was enacted in response to crisis-level removals of American Indian and Alaska Native children from their families and communities by state child welfare and private adoption agencies. Noncompliance and implementation challenges, however, have meant that Indigenous children are still disproportionately removed from their families and communities. Efforts to improve enforcement of federal and state ICWA laws and address barriers for Indian families and Tribes—such as high attorney fees in cases where a state or private actor violates ICWA or unsuccessfully opposes the application of ICWA—would have positive impacts.
• In 2022 and 2023, the White House published memoranda for federal agencies explaining Indigenous Knowledge and its importance in federal decision making, along with guidance on incorporating Indigenous Knowledge in federal activities and on beginning implementation of the guidance. Indigenous leaders and scholars have welcomed this step toward inclusion of Indigenous Knowledge in federal decision making and are eager to see the breadth, depth, and sustainability of its implementation.
• The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) recognizes and affirms the rights of Indigenous Peoples worldwide, including their right to self-determination; control over their lands and resources; protection of their cultural heritage; and the requirement of free, prior, and informed consent in matters affecting them. However, the United States has never formally endorsed this document or adopted it. U.S. adoption would require changes to Federal Indian Law.
• It is also important that the federal government and federal agencies engage in government-to-government relationships with Indigenous Nations, respecting their sovereignty and rights to practice self-determination. This relationship is grounded in the U.S. Constitution, Federal Indian Law, regulations, and executive orders.

Due to ongoing Federal Indian Law and the lack of full funding for developing potential positive policies, we continue to see Indigenous communities face adverse current community conditions. In the next section, we explain deficits in Indigenous community education, health, and child welfare outcomes and discuss positive approaches that have been used to better community conditions.

Approaches for Improving Indigenous Child and Youth Outcomes

Education trends for Indigenous children and youth

Looking at education opportunities, several systemic issues hinder Indigenous children and youth’s access to high-quality education. For example, Indigenous students are less likely than White students to be taught by someone of their own race and ethnicity, which may expose them to culturally inappropriate teaching practices and classroom content. Moreover, data on school suspensions and law enforcement referrals reveal that Indigenous students have disproportionately high rates of out-of-school suspensions and arrests. Data also show lower reading and mathematics scores for Indigenous students relative to White students, which is especially true for Indigenous students in Bureau of Indian Education schools.

However, not all schools or systems are the same, and some may represent models or approaches for improving outcomes. Indigenous students in Oregon and Oklahoma, for example, perform at reading levels three times higher than those in Alaska and Arizona, suggesting that some school systems provide supports that facilitate Indigenous student success. Culturally oriented learning environments offered by Tribal Head Start and language immersion schools—as well as initiatives that increase access to early education, like the universal pre-K program in Tulsa, Oklahoma—may also mitigate educational inequity. Despite obstacles faced in primary and secondary schools, 22 percent of 18–24-year-old Indigenous students still enroll in college. A noteworthy avenue to support Indigenous students pursuing higher education includes attention to services for parenting students. More than one in four Indigenous undergraduate students are parenting, with 31 percent of American Indian and Alaska Native students and 18 percent of Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander students having dependent children, respectively. Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) are twice as likely to offer on-campus child care to their students than other institutions, demonstrating a culturally responsive commitment to supporting the needs of students.

Health and well-being trends among Indigenous children, youth, and families

Due to colonialism and ongoing trauma, Indigenous children and youth are overrepresented in the foster care system. Indigenous youth also have high rates of using alcohol and other substances, which are often linked to high rates of suicide. While it’s important to acknowledge these statistics, which tell part of the story of Indigenous families, research that only focuses on negative outcomes misses the inherent strengths, resilience, and hope present in Indigenous communities and cultures. Culturally responsive research and evaluation can help shift narratives to address current community conditions and highlight assets.

For example, in addition to producing data on the early learning environment within Head Start, the American Indian and Alaska Native Family and Child Experiences Survey (AIAN FACES)—which is guided by a Tribal working group—has found that children in Region XI Head Start programs (operated with grants to federally recognized Tribes and Tribal consortia) are culturally engaged in their families, communities, and classrooms. Seventy percent of Head Start children in this region had the opportunity to learn directly from Indigenous Elders and cultural practitioners, and 43 percent had opportunities to learn from Native language speakers. These Tribally operated Region XI Head Start programs—along with programs funded by the Tribal Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Program—promote Indigenous early childhood development, healing, and thriving through the celebration of culture and language. Furthermore, these programs not only contribute to positive outcomes for children, but also offer essential familial support through coordination and referral to other services.

Drawing on culture as a preventative and protective factor

Despite a history of colonialism and historical and ongoing cultural traumas, Indigenous cultures serve as preventive and protective factors for Indigenous children and families by influencing identity and behavior. Immersing children in their culture provides them with nurturing and protective benefits that contribute to community healing and resilience, and which may prevent negative outcomes from occurring altogether. These strengths will continue to guide young people as they move from childhood into adulthood to have families of their own. Indigenous cultures help build resilience against adverse conditions and outcomes.

Researchers can engage with work that centers Indigenous cultures and funders can identify culturally based work as a priority for funding. There are six main areas of Indigenous cultures that are linked to preventative and protective factors: 1) enculturation and identity formation; 2) traditional games and activities; 3) relationships with the land, including subsistence; 4) social connectedness across generations and with community; 5) Indigenous languages; and 6) spirituality and ceremonies. This cultural connectedness is intricately related to Indigenous children’s overall sense of well-being and health.

Protective Factors for Indigenous Children and Families

Drawing on Indigenous methodologies

Indigenous methodologies present a way to fund and conduct research with Indigenous Peoples that is grounded in Indigenous epistemologies (ways of knowing), ontologies (understandings of nature and human existence), and axiologies (values, value judgements, and ethics). The goal of Indigenous methodologies is not only to have an Indigenous perspective, but to actually work from an Indigenous paradigm entirely. This paradigm is grounded in the Indigenous concept of relationality, or the relationships among all people and things. As Tess Abrahamson-Richards explained at a recent Native Children’s Research Exchange conference: “Indigenous methodologies are radically place-based; rooted in context; often oriented towards practicality; holistic and relational rather than reducing and separating parts of the whole.” They center Indigenous voices and experiences by engaging community members in the work and in evaluating grants for funding.

Recommended Research, Evaluation, Technical Assistance, and Funding Approaches

Building on our discussion of culture as a protective factor and the use of Indigenous methodologies, this section provides guidance on how people may respectfully approach work and funding relating to Indigenous populations. The goal is to begin to counteract the impacts of colonization, inadequate and/or harmful federal policies, and research abuses to move forward in “a good way,” centering Indigenous cultures and strengths. While each Indigenous community is different and there is no single checklist for respectful engagement, the recommendations below can lay the foundation for conducting research, evaluation, and technical assistance that benefits Indigenous children, youth, and families.

• Incorporate accountability, acknowledgment, and recognition of historical wrongdoings and ongoing colonization to work toward reconciliation, reparation, and decolonization, and to change institutions, reviews, and practices.
• Address power imbalances and center free, prior, and informed consent.
• Draw on participatory research approaches and co-production of knowledge, and center lived experiences in methodology.
• Support asset-based, survivor-centered, and trauma-informed approaches to research/evaluation inquiry and technical assistance focused on Indigenous identity, Traditional practices, relationality with the land, subsistence living and practices, culture as a preventative and protective factor, social connectedness, language revitalization efforts, and spirituality.
• Engage in culturally safe and responsive research and evaluation to highlight the successes of culturally informed programming, as well as possibilities for further integration and alignment of systems with the cultural worldviews of Indigenous Peoples.
• Promote best practices for data collection with Indigenous Peoples and honor Indigenous data governance and data sovereignty.

Funders, specifically, can support beneficial research, evaluation, and technical assistance that draws on culture as a protective factor:

• Leverage the power of culture as a protective factor by investing in Indigenous culturally based projects, programs, and initiatives to address current community conditions.
• Include culture as a protective factor in funding announcements and requests for proposals as a fundable approach.
• Value Indigenous methods, methodologies, and culture as rigorous approaches in research, evaluation, technical assistance, and programmatic work.