C.F.R. » Title 25 » CHAPTER V—BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, AND INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES › PART 900—CONTRACTS UNDER THE INDIAN SELF-DETERMINATION AND EDUCATION ASSISTANCE ACT › Subpart C—Contract Proposal Contents

25 C.F.R. § 900.12

Are the proposal contents requirements the same for renewal of a contract that is expiring and for securing an annual funding agreement after the first year of the funding agreement?

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

No. In these situations, an Indian tribe or tribal organization should submit a renewal proposal (or notification of intent not to renew) or an annual funding agreement proposal at least 90 days before the expiration date of the contract or existing annual funding agreement. The proposal shall provide funding information in the same detail and format as the original proposal and may also identify any significant proposed changes.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2015–2023 · leading case: Navajo Health Found.-Sage Mem'l Hosp., Inc. v. Burwell, 100 F. Supp. 3d 1122 (D.N.M. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Navajo Health Found.-Sage Mem'l Hosp., Inc. v. Burwell, 100 F. Supp. 3d 1122 (D.N.M. 2015). · cites it 4× “§§ k50f(a)(2) and k50j (c)(1), 25 C.F.R. §§ 900.12 and 900.8(h), the Navajo Nation Council’s Resolution CJN-35-05 passed on June 3, 2005 (“Resolution”) attached as At *1130 tachment 1 to the Contract, and Article V, Section 2(A) of the Contract, the Contract is amended as stated…”
Navajo Nation v. DOI, 57 F.4th 285 (D.C. Cir. 2023). “See 25 C.F.R. § 900.12 . Perhaps recognizing the shortcomings of this position, the DOI instead maintains that the 2017 AFA, which requested an amount similar to the amount that was “deemed approved” in 2014, see id.”
Navajo Health Found.-Sage Mem'l Hosp., Inc. v. Burwell, 256 F. Supp. 3d 1186 (D.N.M. 2015). · cites it 2× “See 25 C.F.R. § 900.12 (detailing the requirements for a proposed successor AFA, and stating that “[t]he proposal shall provide funding information in the same detail and format as the original proposal and may also identify any significant proposed changes” (emphasis added)).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.