Hearing Brief: Martinez-Yazzie Court Comments on Native American Students - July 2021
Summary
AI-generated summaryThe LFC brief says the court included Native American students among students considered at risk and described their need for educational supports. It also reports that the court found shortcomings in services, technical assistance, and consultation with tribal governments.
Page 1 · source excerpt
The court included Native American students in the definition of “at-risk student,”Open page 1
Page 1 · source excerpt
Additionally, the state failed to adequately consult with tribal governments or comply with state acts pertaining to Indian and Bilingual Multicultural education.Open page 1
The brief says the court ordered the state to provide resources for at-risk students, but did not prescribe specific remedies. It also describes a later order addressing digital devices, high-speed internet, and IT staff for 23 focus school districts.
Page 1 · source excerpt
The order did not specify remedies but broadly required the state to increase financial resources for evidence-based education interventionsOpen page 1
Page 1 · source excerpt
the court further ordered the state to immediately provide access to digital devices, high-speed Internet, and IT staff for the 23 focus school districts.Open page 1
The brief reports that an LFC evaluation found some recent improvement in Native American student outcomes, while Native American students continued to lag behind peers. It also describes state funding and other measures, alongside Tribal Education Alliance proposals for broader investment in tribal capacity.
Page 2 · source excerpt
However, consistent with court findings, Native American students still lagged behind peers in these performance metrics.Open page 2
Page 3 · source excerpt
TEA notes the framework contrasts the state’s piecemeal reforms and small-scale state grant funding approach with a significant, system-wide investment in tribal capacity.Open page 3
Key points
The court credited testimony that Native American students should have access to academic, cultural, language, and other supports.
Page 1 · source excerpt
The court credited testimony that Native American students should have access to:
Open page 1Page 1 · source excerpt
curriculum and materials reflecting indigenous culture and language;
Open page 1The LFC evaluation described gaps in bilingual multicultural program participation and Native-language proficiency: the brief says 22 percent of Native American students were enrolled in those programs, and reports proficiency levels among participants.
Page 2 · source excerpt
only 22 percent of the Native American student population were enrolled.
Open page 2Page 2 · source excerpt
53 percent of BMEP participants having no proficiency, 42 percent showing limited proficiency, and 5 percent demonstrating fluency.
Open page 2The LFC evaluation found that nearly 30 percent of Indian education fund awards went unspent over three years and that awardees did not achieve half of grant deliverables and requirements.
Page 2 · source excerpt
almost 30 percent of Indian education fund awards went unspent in the last 3 years, and awardees did not achieve half of grant deliverables and requirements.
Open page 2PED reported that a $2 million earmark for culturally and linguistically responsive materials remained unspent because it received too few adequate proposals and bids.
Page 2 · source excerpt
The department reported the $2 million earmark remained unspent due to a lack of adequate proposals and bids for the initiative
Open page 2The Tribal Education Alliance’s proposed FY22 framework included $196.6 million in requested state appropriations across proposed legislation addressing language funding, tribal education departments, infrastructure and resources, and higher education.
Page 3 · source excerpt
For FY22, TEA’s request for the tribal remedy framework included $196.6 million in state appropriations
Open page 3
Questions to follow
- How did student outcomes and access to the supports identified in the brief change after the July 2021 hearing?
- What steps, if any, did PED take to address the reported lack of adequate proposals for culturally and linguistically responsive materials?
- How were the Tribal Education Alliance’s proposed investments considered in later state budget and policy decisions?
Generated Oct 21, 2026 · Citations refer to the saved original.
Original source: New Mexico Legislative Finance Committee
Help keep this archive accurate
Found an error or missing context? Send a private report to the review inbox. Reports do not automatically change or remove public content.
Commentary
AI-generated analysisThe brief presents reported progress alongside ongoing gaps. That combination could make it useful to examine both student outcomes and access to specific programs when assessing the state’s initiatives; the brief does not establish that any one initiative caused the reported changes.
Page 2 · source excerpt
Open page 2Page 2 · source excerpt
Open page 2The reported unspent awards and lack of adequate proposals could point to challenges in getting funds and curriculum projects into use. The brief offers a specific explanation for the earmark, but does not establish the causes of all unspent awards.
Page 2 · source excerpt
Open page 2Page 2 · source excerpt
Open page 2