There was no error where ICWA notice referenced one minor but not her sister. Mother challenged the notices mailed to the tribes because they referenced one of the minors, E., but not the other minor, P. The Department conceded the error but argued that it was harmless because the minors had the same father and tribal investigations had already determined that E. was not an Indian child. The appellate court rejected mother’s argument, finding any error harmless. Even a limited remand would be an empty formality as there was no doubt that the tribes would respond the same way concerning P. as they had with E. The court declined to condone delaying permanence for an empty exercise with a preordained outcome. Likewise it was not prejudicial that the notices were not addressed to the tribal chair because notice was clearly received by the tribe. The court also held the lack of explicit ICWA findings was not error, because there was an implicit ruling that ICWA did not apply.