Band Recognition under the Indian Act: What We Heard Report
February 2026
Table of contents
1. Background
Indigenous Services Canada's New Bands/Band Amalgamations (NBBA) Policy (the Policy) was first introduced in 1978 as part of the Lands Management and Procedures Manual to provide guidelines for assessing proposals to create new bands or to amalgamate bands under Section 17 of the Indian Act. The Policy has been revised twice: first in 1988, when cost neutrality was incorporated and again in 1991. The Policy has remained largely unchanged since 1991, despite a 2001 evaluation by the Departmental Audit and Evaluation Branch, which highlighted the need for greater clarity and improvements.
Over the years, multiple attempts to update the Policy have been made, but challenges persisted. The NBBA Policy has long been viewed as vague, lacking transparency, and imposing unrealistic requirements that made it difficult for First Nations and collectives to navigate the band recognition process.
The Policy also fails to address more complex recognition cases and presents challenges such as unclear procedural steps, a cost neutrality clause and the omission of New Band recognition by Governor in Council declaration under sub-section 2(1) of the Indian Act.
Moreover, the Policy does not align with modern reconciliation efforts, including Canada's commitment to Nation-to-Nation relationship building, the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (UNDA) and compliance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) (PDF), and the longer-term vision of transferring services to Indigenous control.
In response to these challenges, Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) re-initiated a policy refresh in 2024. This update aims to create a clear, transparent, and flexible policy that better reflects First Nation and collectives' self-determination and rights-based approaches to band recognition, and guides both collectives and Government of Canada officials in the band recognition process.
In summer 2024, as part of the Policy refresh and working in collaboration with the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), ISC launched an engagement process to seek the input of First Nations and collectives. The AFN developed a comprehensive questionnaire, which ISC adapted (Annex A), to engage directly with those involved in or have an interest in the band recognition process to gather their insights on the challenges they face and their expectations for a revised policy. ISC conducted discussions with 8 First Nations and collectives, while the AFN held one-on-one discussions with five, for a total of 13 First Nations and collectives engaged in this process, aiming to ensure a diverse representation of experiences. It is also important to note that participant confidentiality was a priority throughout the process, as outlined in sections 3.3 and 3.4.
This engagement process would not have been possible without the openness and contributions of First Nations leaders and representatives who provided valuable insights and recommendations. Their input is instrumental in shaping a policy that respects the diverse histories, needs, and aspirations of First Nations and collectives across Canada.
ISC would like to thank the participating First Nations and collectives for sharing their experiences, perspectives, and challenges. The department acknowledges the tireless efforts of First Nation leaderships and their teams, whose work has often spanned generations, in the pursuit of federal recognition as bands under the Indian Act.
2. About this report
This What We Heard report presents the views and experiences of First Nations and collectives regarding the current NBBA Policy and the band recognition process. Based on one-on-one engagement sessions led by ISC and the AFN, the report brings together the findings of both ISC and AFN-led discussions. Its objective is to capture their perspectives on the barriers within the Policy and recommendations for its redesign.
The sections that follow provide an overview of the methodology, the engagement process, a summary of perspectives shared, and a thematic analysis of key issues raised. These include concerns related to policy clarity, capacity and funding, timelines, and land requirements. The report presents these insights as shared by participants and is intended to contribute to a broader understanding of the experiences of First Nations and collectives engaging with the NBBA Policy and the band recognition process more broadly.
3. Methodology
As part of the NBBA Policy refresh, and to better understand First Nations' and collectives' experiences with the current policy and the band recognition process, engagement notes and questionnaire responses were reviewed and analyzed thematically to identify recurring issues and priorities. A structured questionnaire guided these discussions and allowed participants to share reflections, highlight challenges, and suggest potential improvements.
3.1 Participant selection
In summer 2024, ISC invited 24 First Nations and collectives from across Canada to participate in virtual one-on-one sessions. At the same time, the AFN invited nine (9) First Nations to participate in respective virtual one-on-one sessions.
Collectives were selected based on their active participation in, or expressed interest in, the band recognition process. This included groups that had submitted requests for band recognition under the NBBA Policy and affiliated First Nation bands of groups seeking to divide.
Of the 33 invited collectives, 13 responded positively to the invite. ISC held discussions with eight (8) First Nations and collectives, while the AFN held discussion with five (5) of them. Participants included First Nation leadership (chiefs and councillors), administrators and legal advisors representing impacted First Nations and collectives. These sessions provided space for a range of perspectives based on regional context, governance roles, and legal considerations. While some of the collectives invited by ISC and the AFN chose not to participate, due to capacity limitations, scheduling conflicts, or other reasons, the feedback from the 13 participating collectives provided valuable and diverse insights.
3.2 Questionnaire overview
ISC used an questionnaire to guide discussions. The questionnaire consisted of 10 open-ended questions and was organized into three key sections:
- Respondent attributes: questions focused on general information about the participating collective, including their region and what they were seeking (e.g., band recognition under the Indian Act, self-governance, reserve lands, etc.).
- Challenges to recognition: questions focused on procedural barriers, governance constraints, and legal complexities within the current NBBA Policy.
- Future direction: questions focused on recommendations for a redesigned policy and suggestions on how ISC can provide better support to groups.
3.3 Engagement process
Discussions were conducted virtually using Microsoft Teams, Zoom and in some cases by phone, and typically lasted between one and two hours. Prior to each session, participants received the questionnaire and a copy of the 1991 NBBA Policy to support informed engagement. In their respective discussions, ISC and AFN staff took detailed notes, which were shared back with participants for validation, ensuring accurate representation of their views.
Informed consent was obtained before each session. Participants were briefed on the purpose of the engagement, how the information would be used, and the confidentiality measures in place to protect their privacy.
3.4 Data collection
The sessions used a qualitative engagement method, allowing for narrative, experience-based input from participants and used open-ended questions. Demographic data, such as participants' regions, were collected to support themes and identify common patterns. However, it should be noted that this report does not identify the regions from which participants came, as ISC wanted to preserve confidentiality. This method was selected to prioritize the lived experiences of First Nations and collectives while also addressing broader policy concerns and identifying areas for policy improvement.
4. Summary of what we heard
The one-on-one engagement sessions provided valuable insights into the challenges faced by First Nations and collectives seeking recognition under the NBBA Policy. Participants shared reflections on the complexities of the band recognition process, highlighting opportunities for enhancing clarity, consistency, and support to improve the overall experience.
While perspectives varied, some participants pointed to challenges related to navigating the Policy in its current form, including challenges related to governance capacity, funding limitations, and unclear procedural guidance. A few collectives noted that the existing policy framework has contributed to uncertainty, particularly when determining eligibility or next steps, often due to inconsistent access to information or resources.
Throughout the discussions, there was a shared interest for a more transparent, responsive, and culturally grounded approach that better supports the unique contexts, histories, and aspirations of First Nations and collectives.
4.1 Key themes
This section outlines the main themes that emerged from the engagement discussions, reflecting a range of perspectives shared by First Nations and collectives regarding their experiences with the band recognition process. ISC and the AFN identified key themes where participants expressed opportunities for improvement: enhancing clarity in the Policy and the band recognition process; expanding capacity and funding opportunities; strengthening consistency, continuity, and departmental coordination; aligning timelines and expectations; and addressing land-related challenges. These insights will guide ISC in fostering a more supportive and effective band recognition process that aligns with the needs and aspirations of First Nations and collectives.
The ISC considerations in this document are intended solely for discussion and to promote open dialogue regarding the NBBA Policy refresh. They do not constitute recommendations, decisions, or commitments by ISC or the Government of Canada. Any potential actions arising from these considerations are subject to further exploration, evaluation of options, and decision-making processes.
4.1.1 Enhancing clarity in the policy and the band recognition process
Throughout the engagement sessions, participants emphasized the value of clearer communication regarding the NBBA policy and its application. Some noted that well-defined procedural steps would enhance the band recognition process, as some collectives have experienced varying guidance across different areas of the department.
Participants articulated a desire for the current policy to better reflect their self-determined pathways to recognition and self-governance. They recommended expanding the Policy's scope to acknowledge broader processes—such as reserve establishment, land management, and section 10 membership control—which would align more closely with their collectives' goals. Participants also raised legal concerns and underlined the importance of ensuring that the Policy is consistent with UNDA and UNDRIP principles and Section 35 of the Constitution Act, particularly regarding Nation-to-Nation relationships.
Information accessibility was another recurring theme. Some collectives noted that they were unaware of the NBBA policy until well into their recognition efforts and had often relied on informal networks or legal advisors to learn about available options to them and processes. In this context, participants expressed a desire for more publicly accessible information and guidance, such as standardized criteria, timelines, and procedural steps, to help inform and support communities throughout their recognition journey.
Overall, participants highlighted the opportunity to enhance clarity and transparency in the band recognition process. They suggested that standardized criteria, timelines, and procedural steps could reduce uncertainty and improve trust. Some also emphasized the importance of flexibility within the Policy to reflect diverse community contexts and governance models.
ISC Considerations: ISC may explore the development of comprehensive guidelines that outline the procedural steps and clarify the roles and responsibilities of all parties involved in the band recognition process. This initiative could create publicly available resources, including practical tools and culturally relevant information, to empower First Nations and collectives in making informed decisions while reducing administrative burdens. By fostering greater clarity and enhancing transparency through publicly available tools and clearer guidance, ISC will leverage an increased support to collectives seeking recognition.
4.1.2 Expanding capacity and funding opportunities
Participants noted that while the process presents opportunities for growth and development, it also requires substantial administrative effort and carries a heavy financial burden. They noted the need for support in compiling extensive legal, historical, and genealogical documentation that is required to meet the Policy's requirements.
Many participants shared their commitment to sustaining their band recognition efforts, acknowledging the challenges posed by a lack of dedicated funding and their reliance on own-source revenues to cover essential costs.
The following subsections provide a detailed breakdown of the specific capacity and funding challenges identified by First Nations and collectives during the engagement process, along with potential avenues for addressing these challenges.
A) Capacity
Many First Nations and collectives seeking recognition described the band recognition process as administratively overwhelming. Participants described challenges in managing the complex requirements of the NBBA policy, which include compiling historical records, legal arguments, and genealogical evidence.
These discussions also revealed that while limited access to federal programs and services in the absence of formal recognition can further impact a collective's ability to sustain the coordination and administrative efforts, there remains a strong desire for collaboration and support in navigating these processes.
It was raised that changes on operational support throughout the years within the Government has resulted in prolonged delays and has made it difficult for many First Nations to advance their band recognition applications. Participants also noted that legal expertise is essential in navigating policy requirements, but that securing consistent legal representation that is accessible to all communities was often out of reach due to staffing, funding, and capacity limitations.
B) Funding
Participants emphasized the importance of sustained and dedicated funding to effectively support the band recognition process. They noted that available financial support, where they exist, may not always align with the long-term and evolving nature of the required work. The reliance on short-term or project-based funding was raised as being a potential limitation. Recognizing the need for continuity, participants expressed a desire for funding mechanisms that support progression through multiple stages of the process.
In addition, participants identified opportunities to enhance clarity and transparency regarding access to financial support. Many expressed a strong interest in improving communications about available resources, which would facilitate better planning and coordination with collectives.
Many First Nations and collectives emphasized the need for dedicated and sustainable funding mechanisms to support them throughout the process and to help ensure fair and equitable access to band recognition.
ISC Considerations: ISC will explore potential pathways in capacity-building initiatives and funding mechanisms that address the specific needs of First Nations and collectives.
4.1.3 Strengthening consistency, continuity and departmental coordination
Participants reflected on the importance of consistent communication and coordination throughout the band recognition process. They noted that, despite staff turnover and the need to update the Policy, there are still opportunities to enhance continuity.
Additionally, participants observed that alignment between different parts of the federal system, such as between regional offices and headquarters, and across departments, can have a significant impact on how the process unfolds. Some described experiencing variations in guidance or timelines depending on the office engaged, which contributed to a sense of unpredictability.
To enhance predictability and equity, First Nations and collectives emphasized the need for a more structured and transparent decision-making framework. Suggestions raised included establishing a formal process for transitioning files between officials and ensuring a better alignment across federal departments.
ISC Considerations: ISC may consider assessing clearer decision-making protocols and transition mechanisms that could ensure continuity and alignment across federal departments. An enhanced coordination approach may facilitate a shared understanding of the recognition process and reduces variations in guidance and timelines.
4.1.4 Aligning timelines and expectations
Participants highlighted the importance of establishing clear timelines in the band recognition process. Defined service standards and procedural benchmarks would enhance predictability, providing First Nations and collectives with a clearer understanding of when formal recognition may occur.
Participants noted that increased transparency regarding the timeline and the role of involved parties would facilitate smoother coordination efforts across multiple stakeholders. By implementing a structured framework, it becomes easier to identify available support that can assist in advancing the process. To address these issues, First Nations emphasized the need for setting realistic timelines and fostering greater transparency in the overall process.
ISC Considerations: ISC acknowledges that defined service standards and realistic timelines for the recognition process could be seen as a shared responsibility with First Nations and collectives. Increased transparency regarding how timelines are determined, and the roles of various stakeholders may enable better coordination among all parties involved. A structured approach might help manage expectations and facilitate smoother navigation through the recognition journey.
4.1.5 Addressing land-related challenges
Several participants also raised concerns about reserve land requirements within the NBBA Policy. Some noted that the existing policy requirements can present challenges depending on the specific context of each collective and whether they are pursuing Band Recognition pursuant to Section 17 or Sub-section 2.1.
Many participants pointed out that one of the most pressing land-related challenges under the current NBBA Policy is the requirement for a land base as a condition for Band Recognition pursuant to Section 17. Some collectives underscored the historical loss of their lands due to forced relocations or dispossession, making it impossible for them to meet current land-related requirements under the Policy. Several participants shared a desire to reclaim traditional lands through the Reserve Creation process, but many have deliberately avoided the process due to its lengthy delays, which could further prolong their recognition efforts.
There was interest in exploring more flexible and adaptive approaches to land considerations within the Policy. Overall, participants emphasized the importance of ensuring that land-related provisions within the Policy are responsive to a wide range of governance and historical contexts, and that they support equitable access to the recognition process.
ISC considerations: ISC is receptive to exploring various approaches that consider the distinct circumstances of First Nations and collectives. ISC recognizes that land-related requirements within the current NBBA Policy can create significant and, in some cases, prohibitive barriers for First Nations. It should be noted that a First Nation collective must be both recognized as a Band and subsequently work with CIRNAC and ISC on potential avenues for reserve creation. In collaboration with CIRNAC, ISC will seek to address the land-related challenges that First Nations and collectives encounter under the NBBA Policy, the Specific Claims Policy, the Additions to Reserve Policy and other relevant policy instruments. Establishing a policy framework that emphasizes flexibility and adaptability to the unique historical and governance contexts of each collective may be beneficial.
5. Conclusion
The insights shared in this report serve as a solid foundation for ongoing efforts to improve and update the NBBA policy. As work on the Policy refresh continues, collaboration with First Nations must remain at the forefront of ISC's efforts. Ongoing engagement and dialogue with First Nations leaders will ensure that the revised policy reflects their lived experiences, governance priorities, and historical contexts. ISC is committed to maintaining open channels of communication and facilitating feedback to adapt to evolving needs and aspirations.
ISC acknowledges the time, expertise, and perspectives shared by all participants and recognizes the importance of maintaining an open, transparent, and ongoing dialogue with First Nations as the Policy evolves, and beyond. As one participant pointed out, we must always remember that "behind all this, there are real people" and approach our work with a genuine commitment to reconciliation.
For more information on the band recognition process and the Policy refresh, please contact reconnaissancedebande-bandrecognition@sac-isc.gc.ca.
6. Appendices
The following questionnaire regarding the future direction of the process was provided to participants. What follows does not include the identifying questions that were collected, such as region, contact information, what the community is seeking, etc.
ISC analyzed responses and published a "What we heard" report and used the responses to identify issues for policy reform. All information and findings were anonymized.
6.1 Annex A : ISC Questionnaire
First Nations Communities Seeking Federal Recognition as Bands under the Indian Act – Oral Questionnaire
Introduction
There are numerous First Nations communities across Canada who are seeking recognition as Bands under the Indian Act. The objective of this questionnaire is to understand the challenges that communities face when seeking recognition from the Government of Canada under the Indian Act.
Context
The Government of Canada's 1991 New Band and Band Amalgamation policy (the Policy) directs the band recognition process. The Policy is guided by the Indian Act which defines the parameters for First Nations Band recognition.
The Policy was created to guide amicable divisions and amalgamations of First Nations bands and address clear cases of division primarily formed of existing registered First Nation individuals affiliated to a band.
Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) is currently undertaking a refresh of the Policy, in collaboration with the AFN, so that the Policy can align with the Government of Canada's current priorities – including Nation-to-Nation relationship building, reconciliation, working towards compliance with the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act and the longer-term vision of transfer of services to Indigenous control. A refresh is also needed to address the numerous barriers and unrealistic requirements within the Policy. ISC is aiming to proceed with the finalization of an updated policy in 2025.
As part of this policy update, ISC and the AFN are seeking input from First Nations communities, leadership and experts who are involved or have an interest in the band recognition process. Respectively, ISC and the AFN will reach out to a number of communities for 1:1 discussions. The AFN and ISC will undertake parallel engagements with impacted communities. Both processes will follow the questions laid out in this questionnaire.
Who should participate in this oral questionnaire?
ISC will invite interested and impacted communities who are not recognized by the AFN to participate in oral-based questionnaire interviews.
Simultaneously, the AFN will invite the leadership and technicians from impacted First Nations who are interested in and/or actively engaged in recognition as bands under the Indian Act to participate in similar oral interviews, following the same questionnaire.
ISC and the AFN will respectively explore follow-up opportunities with 1:1 participants to complete portions of this questionnaire electronically, post-interview.
Is the information confidential?
ISC will ensure that all information collected from respondents is kept confidential indefinitely. ISC will protect all information collected from unwarranted access and disclosure throughout the survey process. ISC will prepare a report using collected information, classified by community features such as region. It will not be possible to identify any individual responses from this report.
Future direction of the process
This final section of the questionnaire asks for your opinion about improvements needed to the federal process to assist collectives who are seeking recognition by the Government of Canada.
- 1. Are you aware of the 1991 New Bands/Band Amalgamation (NBBA) policy and process available to communities seeking recognition?
- 2. Has your community filed a request under the 1991 NBBA policy to seek recognition as a Band under the Indian Act?
- 2a. If yes, what challenges, if any, has your community faced seeking recognition as a Band in the 1991 NBBA Policy process?
- 3. Does the 1991 New Bands/Band Amalgamation (NBBA) policy provide an adequate mechanism for your community to seek recognition?
- 3a. If not, what changes, if any, should be made to the 1991 NBBA policy to better serve communities seeking recognition?
- 4. What are the most significant barriers your community has faced in seeking recognition as a Band under the Indian Act?
- 5. In what areas do you see the 1991 NBBA policy helping to advance the vision and aspirations for your community? What is missing?
- 6. Does your community feel adequately supported by Indigenous Services Canada to achieve the vision and aspirations of your community with regards to band recognition? (If your community has already received recognition, did you feel adequately supported in the band recognition process?) If not, how could Indigenous Services Canada support (or have supported) you better?
- 7. We recognize that the ISC webpage on band recognition is out of date with regards to publicly available information on band recognition and the 1991 NBBA policy: About band membership and how to transfer to or create a band. What additional information from ISC would you like to see?
- 8. Do you have any final comments or suggestions about the 1991 NBBA policy and process that this questionnaire leaves out?