There’s no single answer. Spanish missions (16th–19th c.) varied by region, era, order, and Indigenous nation. But patterns emerge:
In California, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Florida, Paraguay, Argentina, Spanish policy concentrated dispersed bands into mission compounds. Indigenous people were required to live there—sleep in dormitories, attend Mass, work mission fields/ranches, learn Spanish/trades. Leaving was "fugitive" status; military retrieval followed.
Some groups sought missions for: food security (drought, game loss), protection (enemy raids, slavers), trade access (tools, cloth, livestock), alliance (against rival tribes). Especially early contact.
Many maintained villages but attended missions seasonally (planting/harvest, festivals). Dual residence was common.
Frequent. Runaways (fugitivos) formed cimarrones (maroon communities). Rebellions: 1781 Yuma (Quechan) destroyed two AZ missions; 1824 Chumash revolt (CA).
Mexico secularized missions → land supposed to go to neophytes. Mostly granted to Mexican elites. Indigenous people became landless laborers on ranchos.
Many lived in missions—some by force, some by choice, most by constrained circumstance. The mission was a tool of colonial transformation, not a home. Indigenous survival happened despite it, often by preserving culture in the cracks.