Keely Saye

Is the failure of the arts to maintain market share among providers of contributed support a short-term problem related to increased social service, health, and educational needs, or will it persist?

In my opinion, the question must be considered from two different perspectives. In reference to the short term, the answer would appear to be an unqualified yes. This can be considered a “short-term” problem in that it is one that has arisen relatively recently. Fundraising in the non-profit/arts sector, particularly in the performing arts, has seldom been more difficult than it is right now.

Deep pocket donors and corporate benefactors are being stretched to the limit as even some of the more venerable arts institutions such as Pasadena Playhouse (The State Theatre Of California) are closing their doors due to lack of operating funds. Shrinking audiences, most likely kept away by the cost of admission, have forced many arts organizations to look to their donor bases for increased assistance. Unfortunately, that donor base is dealing with the same economy as the absent ticketholder, and must also make cuts. The arts are often the first (perceived) extras to be trimmed from most budgets. In this sense, the answer is clearly “yes, we are facing a short-term problem.” The question that seems begged in the final four words of the initial query is how do we keep it from persisting?

In a word: education.

A logical conundrum does seem to exist when the solution for waning sponsorship involves the promotion of one of the very pursuits which threaten contributions. However, it is only through cultural enlightenment and a broadening of the awareness of those we seek to educate that a permanent respite from the dreaded cutback slaughter will be obtained. An societal appreciation for the arts can be affected through a broadened academic emphasis as well as parental and peer group exposure. A populace more comfortable with and invested in the arts will support cultural endeavors with greater enthusiasm on a corporate/individual giving level as well as in attendance.

Is the failure of the arts to maintain market share among providers of contributed support a short-term problem related to increased social service, health, and educational needs? Absolutely. Will it persist? Hopefully not, with increased effort and awareness.

Join in the conversation. Do you agree? Tell me what you think.

The Americans for the Arts and the Cultural Council of Richland and Lexington Counties need your feedback. Please answer this one question posed in Andy Witt’s Green Paper discussion on “Private Sector Support for the Arts”.

How can we engage the business community as arts participants in other ways other than requesting cash donations?

Read the full Green Paper, or read a quick summary of what it’s all about. Thank you!

I’m proud to serve as an Ambassador to the Cultural Council of Richland and Lexington Counties’ Green Paper on Private Sector Support for the Arts. This short vision of the future is meant to inspire a dialogue on the future of the arts, so I invite you to comment, make suggestions, and offer alternative visions in this virtual exchange of ideas through the ARTSblog Green Papers.

Andy Witt is the Executive Director of the Cultural Council of Richland and Lexington Counties. I encourage you to read Andy’s Green Paper on Private Sector Support for the Arts in its entirety, but here is a quick summary with questions at the end:

In the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s, business and civic leaders recognized the need to support the growing diversity of arts groups, beyond the traditional symphony and museums. In communities across the country, United Arts Funds (UAFs), Arts & Business Councils (ABCs) and Business Committees for the Arts (BCAs) were established to offer centralized funding support. Businesses were happy to give one (supposedly) large chunk of cash to reduce the growing number of individual solicitations, and they would get the benefit of knowing they were supporting their community and the arts at the same time.

 Then, the rise in individual income among the baby boomer population made the arts popular. Alternative theatres grew. Non-profit galleries exhibited new and controversial works of local artists. And the need for cash increased at a much greater rate than funders could provide. Enter – the government.

 Cities and counties were tapped. New taxes were approved, and state arts councils made grants. But public dollars required public service, so money was made available for free events for the underserved, education programs, or other public art and cultural activities. These new grants required new programs and more staff.

 Businesses, foundations, UAFs and donors came under even more pressure to support the quality and diversity of all these activities. More funds were raised in many cases, but as the funding pie grew bigger, more pieces were being cut. The slices got smaller and smaller, and in many cases, some groups got no pie at all.

However, recently the economy ain’t doing so good to be perfectly frank. Funders are faced with more difficult choices like poverty, homelessness, education and drop out rates. They are concerned about the costs of overhead, program duplication, and how their contributions are aligned with the company’s charitable goals.

So here we are, and what do we do now? Our organizations need cash that doesn’t require more work for an already strapped staff. It’s your turn to help us answer some hard questions and provide solutions about private sector support for the arts. Please give us your feedback on the following questions:Is the failure of the arts to maintain market share a short-term problem related to increased social service, health and educational needs? Or will the problem persist long-term?

1. How do we define the relevance of the arts to business in the face of urgent and basic social needs?
2. Are funding losses a symptom of a more fundamental problem related to donors and funders not appreciating the arts?
3. How can we engage the business community as arts participants in ways other than requesting cash donations?
4. Foundations appear to be dropping the arts from their funding priorities. How can we reverse this trend?
5. Can we find a better way to tell the story of the benefits of the arts on social issues like health care?
6. Should United Arts Funds (UAFs) change from providing the majority of their grants for operating support to a multi-level approach to foster artistic, audience, and economic development

Follow this conversation thoroughly by adding the Private Sector Support for the Arts feed to your RSS reader. If you wish to share your comments anonymously, please feel free to use an alias in the “Name” box of the Comments section. Thank you for your feedback!