How Tribal-Research Partnerships Are Closing Economic Data Gaps and Reshaping Policy 

Collaborative research partnerships between tribal practitioners and institutional researchers are transforming economic understanding in Indian Country by addressing longstanding data gaps through respectful, sovereignty-honoring models. Initiatives like the Center for Indian Country Development’s Survey of Native Nations—co-created with tribal leaders—and its partnership with Native CDFIs to reveal a stark 32-to-1 wealth ratio demonstrate how combining community trust with research rigor yields actionable insights. These collaborations move beyond extractive research by prioritizing relationship-building, data sovereignty, and practitioner expertise, ultimately building a more accurate evidence base to inform policy and empower Native economies through co-created knowledge.

How Tribal-Research Partnerships Are Closing Economic Data Gaps and Reshaping Policy 

“Tribes individually are powerhouses. They’re sovereign nations,” observed Amber Schulz-Oliver, executive director of the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians. “If we can amplify those important voices and bring together the commonalities, the issues have more visibility” . 

The persistent lack of reliable economic data from Native communities has long hindered effective policymaking and resource allocation. Often relegated to the “asterisk nation” in national datasets due to statistically insignificant sample sizes, tribal economies have remained largely invisible in mainstream economic analysis . This data void is now being filled through an innovative model of collaboration that pairs tribal practitioners with institutional researchers, fundamentally transforming how economic development is understood and supported in Indian Country. 

At the forefront of this movement is the Center for Indian Country Development (CICD) at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which recently celebrated its tenth anniversary. Through partnerships with tribal governments, Native Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs), and regional Native organizations, the CICD is building a new foundation of evidence that respects tribal sovereignty while producing actionable insights . 

The Stark Reality Behind the Data Gaps 

The economic challenges in Indian Country are well-documented but have often been discussed in generalities due to insufficient data. According to the Federal Reserve’s own research: 

• Native American households consistently report a lower likelihood of having $400 available for emergency expenses compared to other groups . 

• Unemployment rates for Native American workers exceed national averages . 

• Native-owned small businesses face significant credit access challenges, being less likely to receive financing even when applying for modest amounts . 

These disparities were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic, when social-distancing measures disproportionately affected sectors like gaming and entertainment where many tribally owned businesses operate . 

Yet, as Federal Reserve Governor Michael S. Barr noted in a recent speech, “We’ll only know whether we’re making economic gains in Indian Country over time if we have timely, high-quality data disaggregated for Native peoples and geographies” . The absence of such data has perpetuated a cycle where limited information leads to inadequate responses, which in turn fails to generate better data about what actually works. 

A Collaborative Model That Actually Works 

The CICD’s approach represents a fundamental shift from traditional extractive research methods to genuine partnership. This model recognizes that meaningful insights emerge when technical expertise meets community knowledge and trusted relationships. 

Case Study: The Survey of Native Nations 

The development of the Survey of Native Nations, which collects comprehensive public finance data from tribal governments, exemplifies this collaborative approach. The initiative began with requests from tribal leaders in Montana who needed better data to communicate their economic contributions and challenges . 

Rather than designing the survey in isolation, CICD embarked on an extensive engagement process: 

• Initial pilot (2023): Worked with five tribal governments in Montana to develop and refine the survey instrument with tribal leader input . 

• Expanded pilot (2024): Staff traveled nationwide to discuss the survey with leaders from 37 tribes . 

• Regional partnerships (2024-2025): Collaborated with the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians (ATNI) and United South and Eastern Tribes (USET) to offer the survey to their members . 

• National launch: October 2025 . 

Amber Schulz-Oliver of ATNI explained the complementary strengths each partner brought: “CICD has a really strong data science shop and the secure infrastructure needed to protect tribal data. What ATNI brings to the table is relationships” . This combination of technical capability and community trust proved essential for collecting sensitive information about tribal revenues and expenditures. 

Case Study: Uncovering the Wealth Gap 

Lakota Vogel, executive director of the Four Bands Community Fund (a Native CDFI serving the Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation), noticed that hundreds of clients reported extremely low financial net worth. “We sit on a lot of paper information about wealth,” Vogel observed . 

Her collaboration with CICD researchers yielded startling findings: a comparison of Four Bands client data with national data on White households indicated a White-to-Native net worth ratio of 32 to 1. While not nationally representative, this analysis provided one of the first quantitative glimpses into the racial wealth gap affecting Native communities. 

The Tangible Benefits of Research Partnerships 

The following table summarizes key advantages of collaborative research models as demonstrated through CICD’s work: 

The Practitioner’s Perspective: Beyond Numbers 

For Lakota Vogel, the value of research collaboration extends far beyond data collection. “As a practitioner, the questions researchers asked help me think of ways to make sure my programming is evidence-based practice,” she explained. “Participating in research like this helps me make sure I’m doing things that are replicable and with purpose, not just based on a gut feeling” . 

This reflective process has tangible effects on service delivery. When preparing for pre- and post-service assessments of clients, Vogel’s team must articulate precise definitions: “What’s the difference between ‘training’ and ‘coaching’? It’s vernacular, but once you’re asked by a researcher, it makes you get really specific about it” . 

Randall Akee, director of the Project on Indigenous Governance and Development at Harvard University, emphasized how collaborations open entirely new research avenues. His work with CICD to study business dynamics on reservations required accessing confidential Census Bureau data—a process made feasible through institutional partnership. “This allowed us to ask questions about business growth and contraction over time on reservations—questions that couldn’t have been asked with public-use external data,” Akee noted . 

Building Trust in a Legacy of Extraction 

Successful collaboration in Indian Country requires navigating historical mistrust of research. “For good reason, tribes are very protective of their data,” noted Schulz-Oliver . Past experiences with external researchers using data in harmful ways have made many communities justifiably cautious. 

The CICD model addresses this through what Schulz-Oliver calls the “slow burn” approach to relationship-building. “Trying to come in, slam something through, and call it a day is never going to work,” she advised. “You really have to have that slow burn that brings people along. Show up, show up, show up until people know your face. Slow down and be really intentional” . 

This patient approach recognizes that data sovereignty—the right of Indigenous peoples to govern the collection, ownership, and application of their data—isn’t just a technical consideration but a fundamental aspect of tribal sovereignty itself. 

Tools for Wider Impact 

Beyond specific research projects, these collaborations have produced public tools that democratize access to economic information: 

• Native Economic Trends: An interactive data visualization tool that brings together decades of information on population, infrastructure, and economic measures for Native geographies . 

• Data dashboards: Tailored resources that help tribal nations make informed decisions about resource allocation, intervention design, and economic growth monitoring . 

These resources shift power dynamics by putting analytical capacity directly into the hands of community decision-makers rather than keeping it siloed within academic or government institutions. 

Why This Matters Beyond Indian Country 

The implications of this collaborative research model extend far beyond tribal communities. As Governor Barr emphasized, “The Federal Reserve promotes a healthy economy and a stable financial system for everyone, and that simply cannot be done without supporting strong and sustainable communities in Indian Country” . 

Native economies are deeply intertwined with regional economies. Tribal casinos attract visitors to surrounding businesses, and Native enterprises subcontract with non-Native-owned businesses. Understanding these connections requires data that accurately reflects tribal economic activity . 

Moreover, the collaborative approach developed through these partnerships offers a template for ethical, effective research in other communities that have been marginalized or exploited by traditional research methods. The principles of respectful engagement, complementary expertise, and shared ownership of findings have universal applicability. 

Looking Forward: The Next Decade of Collaboration 

As the CICD enters its second decade, the foundations laid through these partnerships position Indian Country to address persistent economic challenges with greater precision and effectiveness. The collaborative model demonstrates that: 

• Research quality improves when diverse perspectives inform question formulation, methodology, and interpretation. 

• Community trust deepens when data collection respects sovereignty and serves tangible community needs. 

• Policy impact amplifies when findings reflect grounded realities rather than statistical abstractions. 

Perhaps most importantly, these collaborations are transforming how knowledge itself is created in Indian Country. As Vogel reflected, “We’re field-building together. Researchers are a partner in this space, not just anthropologists analyzing us on the side. Industry knowledge is actually something we can build together” . 

This shift from extraction to co-creation represents more than just a methodological improvement—it’s a restoration of Indigenous agency in defining and addressing economic challenges. By honoring both technical rigor and community wisdom, these partnerships are closing data gaps while opening new pathways to prosperity that respect tribal sovereignty and self-determination.