Slide 1

Slide 2

Did you know what state arts agencies were, or what they did, before starting in the AAD program? If not, what are some ideas for how SAAs can raise their visibility amongst the general public? Do you think SAAs should be designed to serve the people, or do you think it makes sense that they generally only serve arts organizations? Similarly, do you think that SAAs should be concerned with the for-profit and/or avocational arts worlds? What do you think of SAAs essentially baiting organizations into developing the kind of programming they want to see (underserved populations, for example) and by extension, taking away some of the agency of the organizations to do what they see best with their own programs? State Arts Agencies 1965-2003: Whose Interest to Serve? Julia F. Lowell (2004)

Slide 3

What prompted the START project The Wallace Foundation began an initiative in 2001 called State Arts Partnerships for Cultural Participation (START). This RAND report summarizes the need for this program and early research findings. 13 SAAs selected to receive multiyear grants, guidance, and research support Overall goal to strengthen SAAs ability to serve state residents and increase public participation in the arts Helping support a shift in SAA focus and funding from bolstering arts organizations to serving people and communities At the time this was written, there was an unprecedented state fiscal crisis unfolding in many states; many SAAs legislative appropriations were slashed These cuts were symptomatic of a lack of a perceived relevance of SAAs to state governments and the general public Cuts reflect[ed] a mismatch between historical mission, role, and structure of SAAs and the current realities they face The Origins of SAAs SAAs originated partly to ameliorate fears of the NEA resembling a European-style Ministry of Culture Early on, these agencies copied their missions and strategies from the NEA, and espoused similarly elitist ideals Focused on building up supply of arts Grants were usually discipline-specific and relied on specialized expertise to award funding Grants targeted large, established institutions and panelists wanted to uphold high arts Grantees did not have to demonstrate community interest Quid pro quo: leadership of these large institutions effectively lobbied for SAA support, and this was an effective arrangement for a long time Mid-1970s Concerns arose that quid pro quo were causing inequitable distribution of funding and less- than-ideal participation of local communities These populist critics argued that cultural participation could also cause increased activity, greater tolerance of an respect for diversity, and higher levels of civic engagement Responses from SAAs included expansion arts grants, which targeted rural and ethnically diverse communities, and more funding for smaller organizations and arts education Decentralization of many SAAs meant funds were set aside to be regranted through LAAs; some like Massachusetts Arts Lottery Council devised methods to get more money to smaller communities with less resources of their own Even with these changes, SAAs still generally conceived of themselves as primarily grantmakers and were still supply-side focused Outline

Slide 4

Early-1980s Nationwide recession combined with drop in NEA basic state grants meant less money for SAAs Restructuring and refocus of many SAAs had hurt them politically and they found it more difficult to get support from past cheerleaders (like large arts organizations) State arts advocacy groups began popping up, but these were often controlled by the same large arts organizations; conflict of interest Economy improved, but did SAAs just dodge a bullet? 1990s-present NEA funding cuts in 1996 combined with cuts to state legislative appropriations to SAAs meant picture was once again bleak; this sounded the alarm SAAs had two new main political objectives: convince average citizens that the arts were relevant to their lives; and convince these same people that their local SAA was important to the arts There was a still greater move away from elitism in the arts SAAs supported towards a focus on inclusiveness; great art rationale for public support of arts diminished Public demand for SAAs to become more: more responsive to publics interests; and more able to demonstrate what they actually do for the public (increased accountability in grantmaking, especially) Need to increase visibility of SAAs to general public START Inititative One objective is to try and get 13 selected SAAs to examine who/what they are funding and why (are they funding the same institutions over and over? are they meeting the needs of the field or the broader public?) Strengthening political ties is crucial to SAAs serving citizens rather than just the arts community, but many dont want to risk alienating known backers and state legislators, who also benefit politically from grants within their districts START trying to help SAAs develop personal connections with key legislators Looking for better measures of outcomes of SAA activities on things like vitality and diversity of local cultural environments and community well-being This initiative questions if SAAs can or should extend their reach into the for-profit and avocational arts world Also questions if it is necessary to move away from primarily serving arts providers and actually assess needs of community needs and desires (maybe average citizens wouldnt have the knowledge or expertise required to give valuable input)

Slide 5

Slide 6

Outline Summary of Findings From 2010 Report: - From START to Finish: Lessons from The Wallace Foundations Work with State Arts Agencies A large majority of the agencies (82 percent of the responding SAAs) said START had prompted them to fund new grant programs aimed specifically at boosting participation. - Close to three quarters (73 percent) rewrote one or more program descriptions to require grantees to include participation-building as a goal. - Ten of the 11 agencies that responded to the survey said that that because of the initiative they had required some or all grantees to report on their grants effect on building participation. - Two-thirds of the agencies altered staff responsibilities to stress participation.

Slide 7

Do you think line-item funding is fair or equitable? How would you better coordinate SAA planning? Why do you think state government politics have a smaller effect on arts funding than citizen politics? State Funding for the Arts

Slide 8

Rosenstein, Riley, Rocha & Boenecke: The distribution and policy implications of US state government general operating support to the arts and culture: Lessons from the great recession Federal funding of GOS (general operating support) disappeared after Culture Wars State & local governments are now primary sources for GOS 4 Reasons why its important to understand GOS: 1)GOS enhances sustainability 2)GOS can intensify inequities between organizations 3)GOS is mostly funded through state arts agencies: 35-40% of SAA $ 4)GOS is often delivered as line items or earmarks rather than grants Impact of Great Recession: o Small to mid-sized organizations affected most o State appropriations of SAAS dropped from $452 million (2001) to $293 million (2010) o SAA grants became less equitable over the 2000s, but still fairly equitable o Line item appropriations dropped from $20.2 million (2009) to $8.3 million (2011) Evidence of double-dipping: receiving money from both line items and grants A need for better coordinated state arts agency planning Lewis & Rushston: Understanding State Spending on the Arts SAAs spend more than double the NEA budget NEA and SAAs spend money similarly: assist professional organizations with grants Larger organizations have lobbied for own line-item funding NEA arts funding is not reflective of public opinion; most Americans favor some public funding of the arts, but prefer local Social liberalism, education and Democratic affiliation have a strong correlation with supporting arts funding Results of study of state spending from 1976-1999 o Per capita revenue & income are most important predicators of per capita spending on the arts o Education affects arts spending when correlated with liberalism o Government liberalism and divided government not as important as expected o State funding for the arts mostly dependent on economic conditions and political attitudes of citizens Outline

Slide 9

Oregon Arts Commission Strategic Plan 2011-2016 What do you think of the partnership and coalition in the plan? Whats your opinion of link the arts with economic development? According to the current condition, do you think all goals can be achieved in 2016?

Slide 10

Outline Belief Brings people tighter, strengthening communities, critical for students, adds value to economy, fundamental to a healthy society. Goal #1: Oregonians have wide access to the arts (11 aspects) This plan calls for stronger communications about the public benefit of the arts and increased efforts to promote Oregons arts beyond the state, also calls for the Oregon Arts Commissions continued leadership to realize the bold fund development vision of the Oregon Cultural Trust. The Commission will increase its efforts in arts advocacy on all levels. A new element of the plan will address significant interest in the arts community to identify and secure different revenue sources for the arts. Goal #2: Oregon arts organization has the skills and resources to offer high- quality programs across the state This plan calls for continued investment in Oregons arts organizations, building their capacity through technical assistance and funding to increase public benefit and provides for new investment in arts groups using Capacity Grants to strengthen their overall management, leadership and standards. Goal#3: Public and Private Support for Arts and Culture are Increased and Leveraged. This plan calls for new efforts to leverage the Commissions capacity as a grant maker and funder, working with others to distribute funds. Goals#4: Oregonians have access to quality arts learning opportunities This plan calls for offer discretionary grant to arts organization support arts activities, increase understanding of benefits in school arts education and arts organizations, advocate for quality arts education program and partner with arts education colleagues, initiate the Oregon Arts Education Partnership, identify and disseminate best practices in arts learning Goal#5: Oregon artists are supported in creating work of acknowledged high quality. This plan calls for increased support for Oregon artists, including the potential development of an all-encompassing artist service organization.

Slide 11

Run for the Position of Executive Director of Oregon Arts Commission

Slide 12

Goal1 Oregonians have wide access to the arts Goal2 Oregon arts organization has the skills and resources to offer high-quality programs across the state Goal3 Public and Private Support for Arts and Culture are Increased and Leveraged. Goals4 Oregonians have access to quality arts learning opportunities Goal5 Oregon artists are supported in creating work of acknowledged high quality.

Slide 13

Slide 14