of the Act constitutes the Indian Self-Determination Act, which, among other things, provides for the execution of contracts between tribes and the federal government to plan, conduct, and administer programs for the benefit of Native Americans. See Pub.L. No. 93-638, tit. I, §§ 101-102, 88 Stat. at 2206. In fact, 25 U.S.C. § 450f, the specific provision cited by plaintiffs, directs the Secretary of the Interior, “upon the request of any Indian tribe by tribal resolution, to enter into a self-determination contract or contracts with a tribal organization to plan, conduct, and administer programs or portions thereof____” 25 U.S.C. § 450f(a)(l). Absent such a contract, however, section 450f does not mandate the payment of money damages. See Samish Indian Nation, 419 F.3d at 1358, 1365 (<HOLDING>); accord id. at 1366 (“Absent a contract this
recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract holding that nonsignatories to a contract have no rights under the contract and thus no standing to assert claims under the contract holding that absent a contract the indian selfdetermination act does not confer a private damage remedy for failure to provide contract funding or contract support costs holding that person who is not party to contract does not have standing to challenge contract holding that for a suit to be brought in the venue in which the contract was to be performed the contract must expressly state where the performance of the contract was to occur