1. No category

Funding Mechanisms
for Arts and Culture
A Survey of Models for Consideration
as Part of the Dayton Regional Cultural Plan
Compiled by
Jane Culbert & Marc Goldring
WolfBrown
August, 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. i
Greater Charlotte Cultural Trust ............................................................................................ 1
Cincinnati - ArtsWave .............................................................................................................. 4
Cleveland – Cuyahoga Arts & Culture................................................................................... 11
Denver – Scientific and Cultural Facilities District ............................................................. 15
Houston Arts Alliance .............................................................................................................. 21
Pittsburgh Cultural Trust and Allegheny Regional Asset District ..................................... 27
St. Louis – Zoo Museum District ........................................................................................... 33
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As part of the background research for the Dayton Regional Cultural Plan,
WolfBrown has compiled information from a variety of communities about funding
for the arts. This information is being circulated in order to assess whether there are
aspects of these models that can or should be adapted for the Dayton region as a way
to create a sustainable funding stream in support of cultural activity.
Most of the information presented here comes from larger communities that have a
more extensive funding base and serve larger populations. While the situations are not
exactly comparable, there may well be lessons that will be useful as Dayton and the
region map the future with respect to funding for arts and culture. In addition, while
the primary focus has been on public sector funding models, we have included several
that are primarily private sector to ensure that a full picture of the available options
are reviewed. Some of this information dates back several years; when possible, it has
been updated.
The following provides a brief overview of the programs included in this summary.
•
Greater Charlotte Cultural Trust: The Cultural Trust is a partnership
between a community foundation, a local arts council, and local cultural
organizations to raise and manage endowments for cultural organizations in the
region. Through this partnership, endowment funds are held at the Cultural
Trust for the Arts and Science Council and cultural organizations in the
Greater Charlotte region. With assets of over $135 million benefiting 25
organizations, the Cultural Trust is the largest supporting foundation of
Foundation For The Carolinas, the community foundation in which it is held.
• ArtsWave, Cincinnati: ArtsWave (formerly the Fine Arts Fund) is a united
arts fund that recently underwent an extensive redesign (including a
restructured and re-branded agency) based on a research study examining the
attitudes of members of the public toward shared responsibility for (and
benefits from) the arts. The results suggested that the field would be better off
if the economic-impact- and arts-education-focused arguments that have
characterized arts advocacy efforts over the past few decades were discarded in
favor of a focus on vibrant neighborhoods and connected, engaged
communities instead. The new identity of the organization was derived from
this research, and programs are being adapted to reflect these new priorities.
i
Monies will be distributed in a different way to reflect these new priorities.
• Cuyahoga Arts & Culture, Cleveland: Cuyahoga Arts & Culture (CAC) is the
result of many years of planning and research. Beginning in 1998, leaders from
arts and cultural organizations, foundations, local governments, and other
private entities cooperated to create an arts and culture plan for the region
which called for public funding to strategically support the local arts and
cultural sector. The result of this work was voter approval in November 2006
of Issue 18, a ten-year one-and-a-half-cent-per-cigarette tax, the revenues from
which are dedicated to support of the county’s arts and cultural assets.
Cuyahoga Arts & Culture was established to oversee distribution of the
resulting funds, and in FY 2011, more than 120 organizations received grants
totaling nearly $15 million.
• Scientific and Cultural Facilities District, Denver: The Scientific and
Cultural Facilities District (SCFD) was established in 1989 to distribute funds
from a 1/10 of 1 percent sales and use tax to cultural facilities throughout the
seven-county Denver, Colorado metropolitan area. The funds support over 300
cultural and scientific facilities at three different levels of funding based on
legally established criteria. The distribution budget is approximately $40 million
annually. Voters reaffirmed their support of the SCFD tax in 1994 and again in
2004 by voting to extend the SCFD tax with 65% voter approval. Voters will
have another opportunity to extend the SCFD in November 2016 before the
June 2018 sunset date.
• Houston Arts Alliance: The Houston Arts Alliance distributes over $3 million
annually in grants to arts organizations and individual artists, using city revenue
that comes from Hotel Occupancy Taxes. Grant programs fund organizations
of all sizes and individual artists.
• Pittsburgh Cultural Trust and Allegheny Regional Asset District:
Pittsburgh has two funding models of note that support the activities of the
cultural sector in the city, one of which is focused on economic development
and facility management and maintenance and the other that provides a
dedicated funding stream for cultural organizations. Together these entities
support Pittsburgh’s thriving cultural sector. Pittsburgh Cultural Trust is a
nonprofit arts organization that is a driving catalyst behind the ongoing
development of the Downtown Pittsburgh Cultural District. This organization
is multi-faceted, including a performing arts presenter, a theater/gallery
owner/operator, a catalyst for Cultural District real estate development, and an
ii
arts collaborator. Some of its funds are derived from real estate development.
Allegheny Regional Asset District is a special purpose area-wide unit of local
government that distributes half of the proceeds from a 1% sales and use tax to
recreation, cultural, sports and civic facilities and programs. Since 1995, the
District has awarded $1.2 billion in grants, including $61.2 million in capital
grants for projects like accessibility, critical infrastructure, and equipment.
•
Zoo Museum District, St. Louis: Founded in 1972, the Metropolitan
Zoological Park and Museum District (ZMD) was created, funded by property
taxes from both the City and the County of St. Louis. It funds major cultural
institutions in Saint Louis. During its years of operation, the District’s annual
tax revenue has increased from $3.9 million dollars in 1972 to more than $72
million dollars in 2009. These funds now cover a significant percentage of each
institution’s operating costs, in exchange for which the participating institutions
offer free or reduced admission to District residents every day. Over $1.3
billion has been raised through this District since its inception over forty years
ago.
iii
GREATER CHARLOTTE CULTURAL TRUST
CHARLOTTE, NC
OVERVIEW
The Greater Charlotte Cultural Trust is dedicated to building a vibrant cultural community by
inspiring planned gifts to the permanent endowments of Charlotte-Mecklenburg’s most important
arts, science, history, and heritage organizations. With assets of over $135 million1 benefiting 25
organizations, the Cultural Trust is the largest supporting foundation of Foundation For The
Carolinas.
HISTORY
The Arts & Science Council (ASC) was founded in 1958 to run a consolidated United Arts Fund
(UAF) drive and serve as a clearing house for cultural events in Charlotte. This year, with the
generous support of individual and corporate donors, ASC raised over $8.3 million through its
Annual Fund Drive. Coupled with public support from the City of Charlotte, Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina Arts Council, a state agency, and various Mecklenburg Towns, ASC has
granted over $14 million to support artists, arts and cultural education, neighborhood cultural
projects and over 30 arts, science, history and heritage organizations.
To ensure the long-term financial health of Cultural Partners (those organizations that receive
operating support funding), the Arts and Science Council Board of Directors voted in the spring of
1993 to launch a major cultural endowment campaign to raise$20-$30 million. In Fiscal Year 1995,
with the assistance of its Cultural Partners, ASC raised $26.16 million for The Endowment for the
Arts & Sciences. In addition, $11 million was raised to benefit specific Cultural Partners (donors
had the option of donated designated endowment funds for management by ASC or directly to the
organizations themselves).
In December 2002, ASC established the Foundation for the Arts & Sciences (now known as the
Greater Charlotte Cultural Trust in 2006) as a supporting organization at the Foundation For The
Carolinas to advance planned giving opportunities for arts, science, and history. The endowment
funds that previously had been held by ASC were transferred to the Foundation for investment
and management. Through this partnership, the expertise of the staff of the Greater Charlotte
Cultural trust with respect to long-term giving opportunities is put to work for the benefit of the
Arts and Science Council as well as other cultural organizations in the region. The resulting
endowments are held and managed by the Foundation.
More recently, The Cultural Facilities Campaign, which was launched in 2006 and completed in
2010, raised $83 million in private support for the benefit of seven cultural organizations in
Charlotte. Gifts to the Cultural Facilities Fund are invested and managed by The Greater Charlotte
Cultural Trust for the benefit of the participating cultural organizations. The Campaign for
Cultural Facilities supported the first phase of cultural projects in the Cultural Facilities Master
Plan, a 25-year vision for cultural facility development across Charlotte-Mecklenburg led by the
Arts & Science Council (ASC). The bulk of the $83 million from the campaign went into
1
Assets as of December 2011
Page 1
endowments supporting four new cultural facilities in Charlotte. The arrangement ties in with the
agreement by Charlotte and Mecklenburg County to use tax money to pay for building a
downtown cultural complex. While arts endowments typically support overall operations, for these
funds, the income from these new endowments will go toward maintenance and operation of the
buildings - expenses such as utility bills, janitorial services and security.
PROGRAM
The goal of this unique partnership between the Arts and Science Council and The Foundation
For The Carolinas is to ensure a vibrant cultural community by providing a platform for growth
and to ensure the financial stability of arts, science, history, and heritage organizations in CharlotteMecklenburg. The Greater Charlotte Cultural Trust is dedicated to building endowments for
Charlotte’s most important cultural organizations through planned giving.
The Cultural Trust’s Executive Director (supported by a Donor Relations Coordinator) works with
development directors of participating organizations and donors to increase understanding of the
benefits of long term giving and to encourage investment in the giving vehicles provided by The
Trust. In addition, participating organizations benefit from lower administrative fees, lower
investment fees, and access to investment vehicles otherwise not available. The partnership has
grown over the years from one of initial distrust and fear of competition to one of trust and
collaboration. The original fears that organizations’ donors would be “stolen” have been resolved,
and the Trust and organizations work together to build relationships with donors and encourage
planned giving.
STRUCTURE
The Cultural Trust is a supporting foundation of Foundation of The Carolinas and the Arts and
Science Council (ASC) and operates independently from ASC and from any of the other cultural
organizations it serves. The Executive Director of the Cultural Trust is an employee of The
Foundation For The Carolinas. The Cultural Trust has a 15-member board of directors, seven of
whom are appointed by the ASC board (including two ex officio members – the President of ASC
and the Board Chair of ASC), seven of whom are selected by the cultural groups (six of the seven
are selected by the organizations with the six largest endowments), and one of whom is from The
Foundation For The Carolinas.
The Cultural Trust sets a recommended spendable rate (based on the Uniform Prudent
Management of Funds Act) and enforces that spending rate for participating organizations.
However, some organizations have quasi-endowments, which means that the funds are portable
(can be taken out of the stewardship of The Cultural Trust) and the organizations can set their own
spending rates. A true endowment, however, can only spend at the rates set by The Cultural Trust,
and the funds are held permanently by The Cultural Trust. Quasi-endowment funds are not
invested in some of the longer-term assets (private equity), and donors do not have the reassurance of guaranteed oversight by The Cultural Trust.
Any cultural organization in the Charlotte region may participate in this program. The official
minimum size for an endowment is $10,000. However, The Cultural Trust has several endowments
that are just beginning to be built that are smaller than that. The largest endowment is that of ASC,
with $35 million.
Page 2
ARTS AND SCIENCE COUNCIL - USE OF ENDOWMENT FUNDS
The Arts and Science Council endowment includes approximately 15 different endowment
accounts, the largest of which is unrestricted. The revenue generated by this unrestricted
endowment is incorporated with other unrestricted funds raised by ASC to support its programs.
The priorities for use of these unrestricted funds are established by the community through the
many community cultural plans conducted by ASC (including those for six surrounding towns) as
well as the recent cultural facilities plan. The single largest investment is in operating grants to
cultural organizations, followed by investment in cultural education.
In addition to the unrestricted endowment, ASC has a number of restricted endowments, revenue
from which supports a variety of programs including arts education, science education, theater, and
other designated areas.
REFERENCES
http://wwwfftc.org/parg.aspx?pid=835
http://www.artsandscience.org/images/stories/AboutASC/History/asc_history_updated_07-2913.pdf
Page 3
ARTSWAVE (FORMERLY FINE ARTS FUND)
CINCINNATI, OHIO
OVERVIEW
ArtsWave (formerly the Fine Arts Fund) is an organization dedicated to creating community
through the arts. The work of the organization includes funding (serving as Cincinnati’s united arts
fund), technical assistance, event sponsor and coordinator, advocacy, information sharing, and arts
education coordinator. ArtsWave supports the anchor arts organizations that play a critical role in
the region, while also broadening the scope of organizations they support, with the goal of building
a community in which even more people benefit from and participate in arts and culture. In
addition, ArtsWave believes it is just as important to have people participate in the arts as it is to
fund the arts. ArtsWave works to ensure that people across the region have opportunities to
engage with the arts and each other, both to reconnect with organizations they already know and
to try new art forms they may not.
In January 2010, the Fine Arts Fund announced the results of a research study examining the
attitudes of members of the public toward shared responsibility for (and benefits from) the arts.
The results suggested that the field would be better off if the economic-impact- and artseducation-focused arguments that have characterized arts advocacy efforts over the past couple of
decades were discarded in favor of a focus on vibrant neighborhoods and connected, engaged
communities instead. Fine Arts Fund subsequently took the additional step of wholly transforming
its name (to ArtsWave), branding identity, and grantmaking priorities to bring them in line with
these findings.
HISTORY
ArtsWave began as the Cincinnati Institute of Fine Arts, founded in 1927 by Mr. & Mrs. Charles P.
and Anna Sinton Taft. The Tafts believed that Cincinnati could truly distinguish itself through a
deep investment in its cultural assets, and the original Institute’s mission was “to further the
musical and artistic education and culture for the people of Cincinnati.” Included was a $1 million
endowment for the arts, contingent on raising $2.5 million in matching funds from the community.
The people of Cincinnati responded and the endowment was created.
In 1949, in response to the financial difficulties of some local arts organizations and the continued
erosion of endowment funds, the Cincinnati Institute of Fine Arts established the Fine Arts Fund
as an annual, community-wide campaign in support of four local arts organizations:
•
•
•
•
Cincinnati Art Museum
Cincinnati Opera
Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra
Taft Museum
This initial campaign surpassed its fundraising goals, helping to establish the Fund’s core mission:
that of ensuring the financial health of its four constituent organizations.
Page 4
Due largely to an increased commitment of support from the corporate community, in 1978 the
Fund was able to expand its support of Cincinnati’s artistic community in two ways. Firstly, four
additional organizations were invited to join the Fund:
•
•
•
•
Cincinnati Ballet
Contemporary Arts Center
Playhouse in the Park
May Festival
Secondly, the Fund established a “Projects Pool” to provide special one-time grants to other,
smaller arts organizations in the region.
In 1995, the Fund again increased its support of Cincinnati’s emerging and established smaller arts
organizations. The Arts Services Office was established to assist in fostering relationships within
the Cincinnati arts community through programs and resources for boards and volunteers. The
Arts Services Office also operates several nationally-recognized programs, including a volunteer
pool to match volunteers with arts clients, and training and tools for board members.
For 83 years, the Fine Arts Fund provided vital support for the greater Cincinnati arts community.
During this period, the Fund evolved several times in response to changing economic and cultural
conditions. Currently, the organization is in the process of transforming its structure, goals,
strategies, and name to meet a new mission: to be a leader and regional catalyst that works to
advance the vitality and vibrancy of Greater Cincinnati by mobilizing the creative energy of the
entire community. The Fine Arts Fund — now known as ArtsWave — will work toward these
larger goals.
The Arts Ripple Effect: The most recent changes for the Fund were based on an extensive research
project that resulted in a 2010 report entitled The Arts Ripple Effect: A Research-Based Strategy to
Build Shared Responsibility for the Arts. (http://www.theartswave.org/about/research-reports)
This report investigated the best way to communicate with the public in order to achieve a shared
sense of responsibility for arts and culture in the community. One key organizing idea was
outlined:
A thriving arts sector creates “ripple effects” of benefits throughout our community, including:
• A vibrant, thriving economy: neighborhoods are more lively, communities are revitalized, tourists and
residents are attracted to the area, etc.
• A more connected population: diverse groups share common experiences, hear new perspectives,
understand each other better, etc.
PROGRAMS
To support a thriving cultural community, ArtsWave offers expert advice and services, connecting
organizations to resources and volunteers, providing funding, and acting as a hub so that they can
efficiently share everything from ideas to printing orders.
•
Funding: As a united arts fund, ArtsWave raises over $10 million each year to grant to
community arts organizations through a variety of programs. Note that all of the funding
Page 5
•
programs of ArtsWave are being redesigned to reflect the new priorities of the agency. The
programs described below will be revised when the planning process is complete.
o Annual Funding: Annual operating support is provided for 18 community-based
member arts organizations. In addition, Operating Support Grants are available to
provide unrestricted support to qualified smaller arts organizations throughout the
Cincinnati area.
o Project Grants: Support for special, one-time events that complement or expand upon
the regular cultural programming of the applying organization. Any arts organization
not currently receiving an ArtsWave Operating Support Grant is eligible to apply.
o Multicultural Arts: Grants for building capacity of smaller organizations that
demonstrate a commitment to reaching diverse audiences.
o Interest-free Loans: Interest free loans up to $10,000 are available to small and mid-sized
arts organizations for demonstrated short-term, cash flow needs.
Events: ArtsWave provides information about cultural organizations and event through the
Greater Cincinnati area through their website (Fun Places to Go). In addition, they organize
their own events to bring people together and create vibrant communities. These programs
have been designed to reflect the priorities identified in The Arts Ripple Effect. ArtsWave events
include:
o Participatory events: ArtsWave organizations annual community participatory arts events.
In September 2010, Paint the Street brought 1500 people from all over greater
Cincinnati -- and beyond -- together for an event that transformed a half-mile of
center-city street pavement into a vibrant and colorful visual art installation. In
December 2010, there was a community carol sing. In 2009, people participated in a
mass dance entitled Splash Dance and the first community carol sing called Surprise
Singing!
o Family Events: Get Smart About Arts and other activities organized by ArtsWave offer
opportunities for families and young people to experience the arts in their own
communities. Teen-oriented activities are provided through an annual event called
Studio. Teens are also given an opportunity to volunteer for any of the many
community arts events offered by ArtsWave.
o Arts Sampler: This series of 6 weekends spread throughout the 12-week annual
community campaign celebrates the creative things — music, dance, theater, museums,
and festivals — happening in large and small ways throughout the region. These
weekends are great opportunities for families, friends, and neighbors to connect with
one another and experience the arts through free events.
o ArtsWave Presents: This program brings musicians, dancers, actors, and artists from
Cincinnati's art organizations into neighborhoods for performances. A vital arts scene
creates thriving neighborhoods where people like to live and visit. This series offers
families, friends, and neighbors a chance to come out and come together for some of
our communities' amazing arts events.
o iSpyArt: ArtsWave offers an opportunity for participants to upload photographs of art
that they see in their daily lives. While most participants are from the Greater
Cincinnati area, there are photographs contributed from across the county.
o Friends for the Arts is an ArtsWave program that encourages young professional to
become involved in the arts through social and networking events (such as a “Surprise
Party”), volunteering, and other special events.
Page 6
•
Arts Education: In 2009, ArtsWave, in collaboration with several arts partners throughout the
region, created the Cincinnati Public Schools Arts Integration Program and piloted it in the 3rd
grade classrooms at four elementary schools. The program infuses the arts into a set
curriculum, providing a new environment where children are excited about learning. The
program is being expanded to fourth grade at the participating schools, and new schools have
joined the program.
•
Volunteer Assistance
o Help with Grant Writing: Applicants may submit draft grant applications for review by
the Unbiased Grant Reading Oversite review team (U-GRO) who volunteer their time
specifically to assist in grant writing.
o Arts Connection: Primarily an e-mail listserve, Arts Connection links volunteers with a
limited amount of time to organizations seeking very short, non-committal volunteer
opportunities.
o Business Volunteers for the Arts: ArtsWave coordinates volunteers from the community to
assist organizations with projects that are six to eight months long.
o BOARDway Bound Board Bank: This program matches trained leaders with arts and
cultural organizations. Candidates have graduated from a board leadership program
sponsored by ArtsWave (such as BOARDway Bound or Business on Board), or a like
leadership program offered elsewhere in the community.
o Training: ArtsWave offers workshops in the capacity building arena on a variety of
topics including marketing accounting, development, grant writing, and personal skill
development (time management, project management, etc.)
Other Programs/Resources
o BOARDway Bound: ArtsWave developed BOARDway Bound as a website dedicated to
developing effective arts and culture board members. On this website, organizations
can register to view video presentations designed to strengthen arts boards and access
potential board members.
o The Arts Services Office (ASO) developed the Virtual Arts Incubator Project (a website) as
a way to offer start-up nonprofit organizations advice and access to helpful links,
materials, forms, and services. On this website, individuals can learn how to establish a
business, build a board of directors, raise money, attract grants, proclaim an
organization's purpose to the world, and make sure money comes in as quickly as it
goes out.
o Ohio Cultural Data Project: Ohio CDP is a powerful online management tool designed to
strengthen arts and cultural organizations. Arts and cultural organizations enter
financial, programmatic, and operational data into a standardized online form and can
then use the CDP to produce a variety of reports designed to help increase
management capacity, identify strengths and challenges, and inform decision-making.
They can also generate reports to be included as part of the application processes to
participating grant-makers (including ArtsWave).
Information/Social Networking: ArtsWave maintains an active online presence through its
website, My.Arts.Blog, ArtsWave Live, and a variety of social networking avenues (Facebook,
Twitter, LinkedIn, Youtube, Vimeo, and others. This active social networking is part of the
agency’s ongoing efforts to build connections within and between communities.
•
•
Page 7
FUNDING DISTRIBUTION MECHANISM
ArtsWave is currently in the process of redesigning its funding programs to reflect the “ripple
effect” impacts of the arts as identified in the research effort completed in 2010. Because
ArtsWave feels that the ability to demonstrate these impacts in the region is important to building
community financial support, a “Measuring the Impact” team (including ArtsWave staff,
representatives of cultural organizations, and community leaders) was set up to define ways to
measure the contribution of arts organizations toward these impacts. The work of the team will be
shared with other cultural and community organizations for discussion and response. Once
finalized, these measurements will form a primary basis upon which ArtsWave will allocate funding
going forward. Revised grant guidelines will be developed and tested with a few organizations
before being formally adopted. Accordingly, the descriptions of programs below may not reflect
programs that ArtsWave offers beginning in 2012.
Each year, ArtsWave provides over $10 million in grants to over 90 organizations based in the
Cincinnati area. Current grants programs include the following:
•
Annual Funding: Annual operating support is provided for 18 community-based member arts
organizations. The organizations came into the fund at different times and the funding base
was set at their entry point based on their budget. As each group was added, it was done with
incremental new funding so none of the current members were disadvantaged by the
expansion. The underlying philosophy of the annual funding was to provide “predictable,
sustainable operating support.” As years went by and the budgets of the organizations
increased (or contracted), the funding ratios got out of balance in relation to budget size,
activities, etc. but the program remained true to the “consistent” funding model (i.e. no
dramatic changes in any allocation so as not to disrupt other organization’s funding) until
recently. ArtsWave has now recognized that funding based almost entirely on legacy is not
what current funders want to see (which is the reason for the new focus on grantmaking based
on measurable current impact mentioned above). This will undoubtedly be balanced against
the need for some sustainable funding in order not to have chaos amongst grantees, but it will
ultimately be a much more flexible and responsive system going forward.
Operating Support Grants are also available to provide unrestricted support to qualified
smaller arts organizations. Eligibility requirements include, but are not limited to, a history of
project support from ArtsWave; three or more years of incorporated operation as an arts
organization; proof of 501(c)(3) tax exempt status; at least one paid staff person; and proof of
fiscal responsibility. The operating support request may not exceed 10% of an organization's
operating expenses for the last fiscal year with a cap of $17,000. Organizations may reapply on
an annual basis.
•
Project Grants: Support for special, one-time events that complement or expand upon the
regular cultural programming of the applying organization. Any arts organization not currently
receiving an ArtsWave Operating Support Grant is eligible to apply. Applicants must have or
be working toward their 501(c)(3) status. Grants may not exceed 50% of project expenses and
there is a maximum grant of $10,000.
•
Multicultural Arts: Grants for building capacity of smaller organizations that demonstrate a
commitment to reaching diverse audiences.
Page 8
o Multicultural Arts Capacity Building Grant: This one-time grant focuses on bolstering an
organization’s fundamental efforts (e.g. marketing, development, website-building, or
space acquisition) so it is an effective organization. There is no application deadline and
awards are determined on a case-by-case basis. Eligible organizations must be
established and emerging culturally diverse organizations that have non-profit status or
are non-profit in nature. Applicants should have, or be working toward, 501(c)3
status. Maximum grant is $10,000.
o Multicultural Arts Accelerator Program: This program is designed to build capacity and
sustainability for small multicultural arts organization throughout the region.
Organizations that are invited to participate have a funding history with ArtsWave and
provide art experiences that bring the community together through offerings that
reflect all the various cultures of the region. The Accelerator provides restricted
operating funds, technical support, professional development workshops, and
roundtables. As the organizations progress through the program, quarterly evaluations
are recorded to indicate progress and expedited growth.
o Multicultural Arts Internship: This new program will match students from various
backgrounds with host arts organizations throughout the region for a summer
internship.
•
Working Capital Bridge Loan Fund: Interest free loans up to $10,000 are available to small
and mid-sized arts organizations for demonstrated short-term, cash flow needs. For example, a
loan may provide financial assistance in the interim until an approved government contract,
grant, or other guaranteed funding is received. Or a loan may provide financial assistance in the
interim until benefit proceeds or box office returns are received (for organizations with at least
two years experience presenting a similar benefit or performance. Applicant organizations must
have had 501(c)3 status for three years, have at least one full-time paid staff person, and must
have an annual operating budget of less than $2 million. Funds for this program were provided
by an individual donor and augmented by funding from a consortium of Cincinnati funders.
ArtsWave’s Executive Committee determines the distribution to the different grant pools. Grants
are reviewed by volunteer committees that represent the donor community. ArtsWave does not
have peer review panels of subject experts. Instead, the committees include a balance of skill sets
(finance/marketing/etc) and some of the committee members serve on some of the arts boards.
However, ArtsWave has not had any problems with actual or perceived conflicts of interest. The
board chairs of the largest member organizations are voting members of ArtsWave’s board (which
ultimately approves the recommendations of the various grant making panels), but since they do
not make up a majority of the voting members, this has never been a problem. ArtsWave has
conflict of interest policies related to business relationships/self-dealing issues, etc. but have not
formalized policies around grant making decisions.
SOURCES OF FUNDING
In FY 2009-2010, 73% of Arts Wave’s funding came through the annual Community Campaign.
Of that funding, 64% came from individuals, 28% from corporations, and 8% from foundations
and other. The balance of support to ArtsWave comes from endowment earnings (13%) and gifts,
grants and bequests (13%). ArtsWave currently receives no government support, although some
funded members receive Ohio Arts Council funding.
Page 9
ADVOCACY
The programs of ArtsWave itself are being revamped and redesigned to serve as ongoing advocacy
regarding the benefits the arts bring to the region. Funding programs are being redesigned to
include measures that will be used to report on changes in impact over time.
RESOURCES
http://www.theartswave.org/
http://www.theartswave.org/about/history
http://www.theartswave.org/about/report-to-the-community
Page 10
CUYAHOGA ARTS & CULTURE
CLEVELAND, OH
OVERVIEW
Cuyahoga Arts & Culture (CAC) is the result of many years of planning and research. Beginning in
1998, leaders from arts and cultural organizations, foundations, local governments, and other
private entities cooperated to create an arts and culture plan for the region which called for public
funding to strategically support the local arts and cultural sector. The result of this work was voter
approval in November 2006 of Issue 18, a ten-year, one-and-a-half-cent-per-cigarette tax, revenues
from which are dedicated to support arts and cultural assets throughout the county. Cuyahoga Arts
& Culture was established to oversee distribution of the resulting funds, and in FY 2013, nearly
200 nonprofit organizations received grants totaling nearly $17 million.
HISTORY
Northeast Ohio’s arts and cultural community rivals that of other major cities nationwide. Indeed,
it is internationally recognized. This rich tradition spans over 200 years, with cultural organizations
and artists as key assets in the region’s history and development. Few metropolitan areas can boast
the depth and breadth of cultural assets this region offers the world. By the mid-1990’s, however, a
number of cultural institutions were suffering from ongoing financial crises. In response to the
threat to Cleveland’s cultural assets, The Cleveland Foundation Civic Study Commission on the
Performing Arts explored the depth of the problem and identified solutions. The Commission
made a number of recommendations to assure the continued vitality of the region’s cultural assets
for generations to come. A key recommendation called for a process to create a community-wide
arts and culture plan for Greater Cleveland. Community Partnership for Arts and Culture (CPAC),
an independent nonprofit, was launched to work with the region’s people to create an arts and
culture blueprint for success.
In 30 months of quantitative and qualitative research, CPAC sponsored nine major studies and 42
regional public forums, producing a solid plan based on data and broad public participation. The
group actively solicited community input from thousands of residents in public meetings, forums,
advisory groups and surveys. Northeast Ohio's Arts & Culture Plan was released in May of 2000
and CPAC was charged with its specified implementation, management, and evaluation.
One of the recommendations of the plan was the establishment of a public sector stream of
funding to support the cultural assets throughout Cuyahoga County. CPAC played a major role in
developing, and eventually securing voter approval, for such a funding stream. Issue 18, which
won in 2006 by 56% to 44%, followed an unsuccessful effort in 2004 which lost by 47% to 53%
(Issue 31). The earlier initiative wrapped arts support together with some unrelated economic
development projects, and sought to secure funding through an increase in the county-wide
property tax. The strategy assumed that the economic development projects would boost support
for the measure but in fact, they did just the opposite. While advocates found it relatively simple
to explain the arts argument – with special emphasis on arts education and kids – voters had
difficulty understanding the economic development projects. For Issue 18, economic
development projects were dropped, the cause became more focused, and the initiative won
Page 11
handily.
The lack of success of Issue 31 had much to do with the fact that it was based on an increase in
the property tax, a very unpopular move. Issue 18, on the other hand, was based on a tobacco
excise tax – the first such initiative of its kind. This required securing state approval for a local
option for this new dedicated tax. Before going this route, advocates researched all of their
options besides property tax. They considered real estate transfer fees, tax on dry cleaning, and tax
on alcohol. They knew that they wanted to raise at least $15 million/year (preferably $20 million)
and to do so in a way that would affect the smallest number of voters. Tobacco proved the
winning combination - every penny of tax on a pack of cigarettes brought in $900,000 and 2/3 of
the local population did not smoke. It was simply a matter of arithmetic to figure out the level that
the tax should be to achieve the desired level of $20 million annually.
While the tobacco industry spent money to characterize smokers as victims (“smokers are an
oppressed minority and should not have to pay”), it was difficult for them to mount an effective
opposition. Even so, the group had to address an editorial in the Wall Street Journal that treated
the tax on smokers as a state constitutional issue.
Group cohesion was essential. The fact that the arts community stayed united led to greater
success in fundraising for the campaign ($1.4 million was spent on advertising – network TV,
cable, a web site, and some print ads). In addition, participating arts organization provided scores
of volunteers.
The advertising messages – based on careful polling – were effective (one of the direct mail pieces
won a national award for political advertising). Most importantly, they overcame the elitist taint of
the arts. (A typical example was an ad with an African America fireman taking his son to the art
museum.) This effective messaging, targeted by sub-region, was aided by careful focus group
research. The themes based around opportunities for seniors and for children had the most
success in communities where the initial case had the highest negatives. Other themes were:
economic benefits, family, education, and contributions to community/social value.
Since issuing its first grant awards in 2008, CAC has invested nearly $65 million to over 150
organizations in Cuyahoga County. Recent efforts to simplify the project support grant application
process are intended to bring in more applicants and expand funding more broadly across the 59
municipalities that make up the county.
CAC is governed by a five-member Board of Trustees appointed by the Cuyahoga County
Executive. Members serve in a voluntary capacity for rotating three-year terms and are charged
with developing CAC’s arts funding policy and approving grant expenditures.
GRANTS PROGRAMS
Cuyahoga Arts & Culture’s grant programs are the primary means by which it supports arts and
culture in Cuyahoga County. Funding for CAC's grant programs is generated by and solely based
on the revenues from the county-wide cigarette excise tax. CAC's grants are available to 501(c)3
nonprofit organizations located in Cuyahoga County and incorporated in the State of Ohio.
Grantee programming must be open to the general public and conducted primarily in Cuyahoga
Page 12
County. Organizations may apply for either General Operating Support or Project Support, but
may not apply for both.
•
•
General Operating Support: The General Operating Support (GOS) grant program is
designed to provide largely unrestricted core support for established, fiscally sound arts or
cultural organizations that consistently offer high quality services to a broad audience. The
GOS grants are awarded for two-year cycles, through a highly competitive application process.
Organizations must meet eligibility requirements outlined in the GOS Guidelines and, if
eligible, compete in a public Grant Application Panel Review. If qualified, GOS grantee
organizations are approved for funding for the grant period.
Project Support: The CAC Project Support (PS) grant program's primary purpose is to
support projects that demonstrate both a strong community benefit and a commitment to
artistic quality. Grants are awarded each year, and organizations may only apply for one project
per funding cycle. Unlike GOS, grantee organizations do not need to have a core mission of
arts and culture, however the PS grant must be directly concerned with the arts or cultural
heritage.
o Project Support I: Provides awards up to $50,000 for nonprofit organizations and
$35,000 for governmental entities. Applicants must have had a permanent base in
Cuyahoga County for at least two years, must have a certified audit and/or Form
990/Form 990EZ, must complete the Ohio Cultural Data Project, and must match
grant funds $1 to $1 with cash.
o Project Support II: Provides awards up to $5,000 for nonprofit organizations.
Applicants must have had a permanent base in Cuyahoga County for at least one year,
must file a Form 990N, Form 990/Form 990EZ, or audit/review, and may have 25%
of 1:1 match from inkind.
In addition, CAC allocates funding for a limited number of Special Initiative grants. The largest of
these is coordinated through the Community Partnership for Arts and Culture (CPAC) for an
innovative individual-artist fellowship program that fulfills its commitment to invest in individual
local artists. Recipients of CPAC’s Creative Workforce Fellowship (CWF) are selected through a
competitive application process adjudicated by a panel of arts professionals from outside of
Cuyahoga County. The CWF program awards 20 fellowships per year. Fellows receive an annual
stipend of $20,000 and access to resources to help nurture them as creative professionals. Support
for individual artists was a commitment made in the Issue 18 campaign; however CAC’s governing
code does not permit it to make grant awards to individuals. In partnership with CPAC, CAC is
able to fund the CWF, while ensuring it does not overstep its legal authority.
GRANTS REVIEW PROCESS
All eligible applications are evaluated by a panel of arts and cultural professionals from outside the
region in a transparent review process. Panelists are selected and appointed by the CAC Board of
Trustees for each grant cycle. Panelists are chosen to represent a cross-section of professionals
qualified to provide expert knowledge of specific arts or cultural disciplines, as well as for their
management experience, professional knowledge of the sector, and prior panel experience. The
CAC staff and trustees take every effort to ensure that the panel is diverse in all respects. All
panelists receive an honorarium for their service. CAC staff notifies all applicants of the panel
review meeting dates, times, and locations, and posts all details on the CAC website in advance. As
Page 13
a unit of government, all CAC panel review sessions are open to the public, and grant applicants or
any other interested individuals are welcome to observe the deliberations, or listen to them
streamed live over the internet.
CAC staff does not take part in the discussion or scoring of applications, nor do they provide
opinions on the applications. In advance of the review process, CAC staff may provide panelists
with objective information regarding an applicant’s grant history with CAC. CAC staff will also
manage all administrative and logistical actions necessary to conduct a successful public meeting;
provide panelists all documentation necessary to evaluate applications effectively; inform the panel
in matters of CAC policy and procedures; provide all available objective information regarding an
applicant to the panel; and collect and tabulate scores. CAC staff makes the grant applications and
support materials available to panelists approximately four weeks prior to the Panel Review in
order to allow panelists sufficient time for preparation and review of applications. During the
public review, the panel provides a qualitative assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of each
application to determine how well the applicant meets the funding criteria.
ADVOCACY
Ongoing efforts are made to keep the public informed about the impact of the funds distributed
through this funding mechanism.
CAC seeks out opportunities to engage the residents of Cuyahoga County to ensure they
understand how public dollars are being used to strengthen the region’s important arts and culture
sector. As a funder, this can be a challenge because CAC has little opportunity for direct contact
with the public. Instead it relies largely on its grant recipients to share with their clientele and
supporters how CAC funds are benefitting them and the larger community. CAC also makes use
of traditional media outreach and social media to inform the public.
In May, CAC released its most recent Report to the Community, which uses data supplied by grant
recipients through the Ohio Cultural Data Project to demonstrate the impact of its grant funding
throughout Cuyahoga County. In addition to becoming he largest public funder of arts and culture
in Ohio, CAC has become one of the largest local funders in the nation. In the few short years
since CAC funding became available, grantee organizations have expand their cultural offerings by
nearly 25 percent, while increasing attendance by more than 5 percent at both free and paid events,
despite the challenging economy. At the same time, visits by school children to CAC-funded
organizations increased more than 1 million from nearly 928,000, while availability of off-site after
school programming increased by more than 100 percent. Arts learning opportunities and
workshops for adults and arts professionals also increased by more than 30 percent.
CAC continues to work with its grant recipients and with other local organizations to expand
general awareness of its grant programs and funding availability, as well as seeking opportunities to
garner national and international attention for its successful funding model.
RESOURCES
http://www.cacgrants.org/
http://www.cacgrants.org/mission-and-history.php
http://www.cacgrants.org/assets/ce/Documents/reports/CAC_2013_Report_to_the_Communit
y.pdf
Page 14
SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL FACILITIES DISTRICT
DENVER, CO
OVERVIEW
Since 1989, Scientific and Cultural Facilities District (SCFD) has distributed funds from a 1/10 of
1% sales and use tax to cultural facilities throughout the seven-county Denver, Colorado
metropolitan area (including Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Broomfield, Denver, Douglas and
Jefferson counties). The funds “…support cultural facilities whose primary purpose is to enlighten
and entertain the public through the production, presentation, exhibition, advancement and
preservation of art, music, theatre, dance, zoology, botany, natural history and cultural history.”
The distribution budget is approximately $40 million annually. Over 300 cultural institutions
receive support and funding at levels established by statute. Voters reaffirmed their support of the
SCFD tax in 1994 and again in 2004 by voting to extend the SCFD tax with 65% voter approval.
Voters will have another opportunity to extend the SCFD in November 2016 before the June 2018
sunset date.
HISTORY
On November 8, 1988, during the worst regional recession in decades, citizens in metropolitan
Denver, Colorado, voted three-to-one to increase their sales tax to support the region’s scientific
and cultural facilities. That day marked the beginning of a new division of local government in
Colorado—the Scientific and Cultural Facilities District (SCFD).
The 1988 vote was an extraordinary event for three reasons. First, it was counter-intuitive that
citizens would vote for a tax increase in such bad economic times. Second, it was a vote to provide
public support for arts and cultural organizations at a time when many pundits doubted the
public’s willingness to support culture with tax dollars. Third, the vote established a regional basis
for supporting cultural organizations, many of which were located in the core city. The region that
was created comprised Denver and the five surrounding suburban counties.
In 1982, the City of Denver’s major cultural institutions, namely the Denver Art Museum, the
Denver Zoo, the Denver Botanic Gardens, and the Denver Museum of Nature and Science
(referred to as the “Big Four”), lost the state funding they had enjoyed for half a century. The
institutions were forced to seek new sources of funding. They set up foundations and raised fees,
but neither of these strategies, nor others that they employed, were able to mitigate the loss of state
funds. In fact, the strategies of new and increased fees had driven attendance down, furthering
financial losses and curtailing planned exhibits and programming.
Trustees of several major Denver cultural organizations explored the possibility of a regional
funding model, looking at St. Louis’ recently enacted version. A regional funding base would
provide a more equitable basis of financial support than reliance on the City and County of Denver
alone. Surveys of attendance and membership rosters supported this plan by indicating that the
majority of visitors to the four cultural institutions were residents of suburban counties outside of
Denver.
Page 15
An initial proposal was drafted for legislative review. The proposed rate of .1 percent sales tax
would raise $13 million. The plan was to direct 75 percent of the revenue to the Big Four, and give
the remaining 25 percent of the revenue to the six counties’ boards of county commissioners (and
Denver City Council) for a locally controlled distribution to smaller cultural organizations in each
county. A proposed selling point would be the lean administrative structure, which allocated less
than 1 percent of revenues to administration of the tax. The tax would be created by the legislature
and ratified by a vote of the citizens in the six-county region.
In January 1986, a bill outlining the cultural district was introduced. Initial debate centered on the
questions of whether public funding for culture was an appropriate use of taxes and what
percentage of the tax burden should be shouldered by Denver and by the suburbs. Additionally,
cultural organizations other than the Big Four had misgivings about the proposed structure.
A campaign to promote the cultural tax ensued and is remembered for its creativity, focus on
message, and penetration of the region. Polling indicated that the campaign would be best served
by focusing on the most popular institutions, such as the zoo. The campaign highlighted the
benefits of supporting cultural organizations, arguing that culture was not only good for the
individual, but it was also good for the community’s quality of life and economic well-being.
On November 8, 1988, more than a half million voters voted yes (by a ratio of three-to-one) to
create the new tax. As prescribed by the enabling legislation, the Scientific and Cultural Facilities
District (SCFD) had a board of directors in place at the time of the vote. Each county appointed a
representative to the board to serve for no more than two consecutive three-year terms. In five of
the counties, these appointments are made by the boards of county commissioners, and in Denver,
the appointment is made by Denver City Council. In addition, the governor appoints three
members of the board, who are also term-limited to no more than two terms, for a total of nine
board members.
The enabling legislation provided the SCFD distribution formula of 65 percent to the Big Four or
“Tier I,” 25 percent to the mid-sized performing and exhibiting organizations or “Tier II,” and 10
percent to the smaller cultural groups operating at the county level (the “Tier III” organizations).
These percentages were adjusted in the 1994 renewal to 59, 28, and 13 percent respectively, to
reflect changes in audience and changes in the number of Tier II and III organizations.
PROGRAM
Scientific and Cultural Collaborative
The Scientific and Cultural Collaborative (SCC) is a non-profit organization comprised of
members of Tier II and Tier I funded by the SCFD. Tier III organizations may pay to opt-in for
specific services.
The purpose of the SCC is to enhance scientific and cultural opportunities for the public through
collaboration and synergy. The SCC members have worked together since 1994 by investing some
of their SCFD awards into joint education and public awareness ventures; in essence, to “do things
together that we could not do alone” in collaboration, regional service, and accessibility.
Page 16
The Collaborative’s education programs have been recognized by the national Arts Education
Partnership and the Colorado Art Educators Association as model programs in collaboration. The
SCC Joint Database, described below, was one of the first in the nation to provide multiple
organizations of diverse missions the ability to maintain and exchange contact information. The
core of SCC is service to the SCFD in areas of support, advocacy, and re-authorization endeavors.
Tier II organizations can choose to be a full member for a maximum of $15,000 or basic member
for a maximum of $5,000. The two levels determine their level of participation: Full members are
involved in all programs while Basic members have access to the Joint Database and the SCC
Directory of Educational Activities. Payments to the SCC coincide with SCFD distribution
payments three times per year.
Tier III organizations may pay for two SCC services: The Joint Database and the Directory of
Educational Activities. Participation includes access to meetings for professional development and
the email newsletter.
Meetings include updates on joint projects, professional development training, and networking
with one another. The SCC committees:
•
•
•
•
•
Board of Directors (executive directors or designated alternates) meet 6 times per year
Education Committee (education or outreach directors/managers) meets 10 times monthly
Marketing Committee (marketing directors or managers) meets 6 times per year
Development Committee (development directors) meets 6 times per year
Volunteer Coordinators (staff working with volunteers) meets 6 times per year.
The Directory of Educational Activities for Teachers and Schools
This annual publication lists 200 education programs from the Scientific and Cultural
Collaborative(SCC) cultural organizations as a one-stop source for assemblies, field trips,
professional teacher training and more. 15,000 copies are distributed to all public and private
schools and homeschool associations in the SCFD.
The Alliance Project
One public school in each of the seven counties is selected by application for a one-year residency
that provides curriculum-based programming at the teachers’ request. Staff works with a team of
interdisciplinary teachers who suggest programs to supplement their curriculum. Then cultural
groups develop and provide the program and are reimbursed for the cost. The unique nature of
the Alliance Project allows teacher teams to request tailor- made workshops, demonstrations,
lectures, and field trips. Buses, substitutes, pre-event contact, evaluation tools, and study guides are
provided to these schools. Cultural organizations gain by developing new programs for their
company. Counties eligible to apply for Fall 2014 include Broomfield (all schools), Arapahoe
(middle or k-8's), and Douglas (not including schools within the city limits of Castle Rock or
Larkspur). Application forms will be available in December and due in April of the following year.
Page 17
The Joint Database
The Community Database, maintained by Target Resource Group, offers all the SCC members the
opportunity to efficiently maintain their own contact information for patrons gathered by
subscribers, single ticket buyers, volunteers, members and donors. Currently, over 710,000
households were listed.
STRUCTURE
The tax boundaries for SCFD are basically the same as the Regional Transportation District (RTD)
boundaries. This state collected special district tax is reported on the Colorado Retail Sales Tax
Return. The CD tax is combined with the RTD and Football District tax (FD) in the total amount
of 1.2%. The Special District tax is located in the third column of the DR 0100. Boundaries for the
tax may be found in publication DRP 1002 “Colorado Retail Sales and Use Tax Rates.”
The Scientific and Cultural Facilities District was created pursuant to Section 32-13-104, C.R.S. and
is a governmental subdivision of the State of Colorado. Section 32-13-106, C.R.S. sets forth the
powers and duties of the Board of Directors of SCFD and includes the power to adopt and amend
rules of procedure.
SCFD is governed by a board of directors which consists of eleven appointees, all of whom are
volunteers who:
•
•
•
•
May serve maximum of two, three-year terms
Hire executive director
Develop report and review requirements governing SCFD funds
Determine timing of reauthorization process, language of ballot question
One director is appointed by each of the seven counties (Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder Broomfield,
Denver, Douglas and Jefferson). An appointee must reside in the county from which s/he is
appointed. Four directors are appointed by the governor.
The SCFD staff works with organizations and the County Cultural Councils to implement the
operations and distribution of funds in accordance with the SCFD statute. The executive director
reports to the board of directors and oversees the distributions and a district staff of four.
There are seven volunteer councils, one per county, which are appointed by the authority in each
county, i.e., county commissioners, the City Council in Broomfield, or by a committee of members
of the Denver City Council. County Cultural Councils review Tier III grant applications, allocate
funds, and review fund use.
FUNDING DISTRIBUTION METHOD
Funds are distributed to qualified organizations at three levels.
•
Tier I Organizations: By statute, Tier I is comprised of the five major regional institutions:
Denver Art Museum, Denver Botanic Gardens, Denver Museum of Nature and Science, the
Denver Zoo, and The Denver Center for the Performing Arts.
Page 18
Tier I institutions have solid reputations for regional and national excellence. In addition to
drawing attendees from the seven-county metro-area and greater Colorado, Tier I
organizations generate considerable out-of-state tourism. Tier I organizations receive 65.5% of
the SCFD funds.
•
Tier II Organizations: Tier II organizations include regional organizations offering
excellence in science and culture. By statute, Tier II organizations receive for funding based
equally on two factors:
•
•
Qualifying annual income
The organization's paid attendance.
Tier II organizations receive 21% of SCFD funds. The 2014 qualifying income threshold for all
organizations to qualify for Tier II is $1,514,482.45. In 2014, there were 25 qualifying Tier II
organizations.
•
Tier III Organizations: Tier III recipients include an astonishing array of small organizations
with cultural and scientific missions. Tier III organizations benefit our neighborhoods and
provide outlets for the most personal cultural interests. Many provide opportunities for
members of the community to be involved as performers and educators. Tier III organizations,
which number over 200, receive 13.5% of the SCFD funds.
SOURCES OF FUNDING
The Scientific Cultural Facilities District Tax or Cultural District (CD) tax is a 0.1% tax that was
voted upon by Metro Denver taxpayers in 1988 and reauthorized in 2006.
GRANTS REVIEW PROCESS
In order to receive funds, agencies of local government and nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations must
fulfill the following requirements:
• primary purpose is to provide for the enlightenment and entertainment of the public
through the production, presentation, exhibition, advancement, or preservation of art,
music, theatre, dance, zoology, botany, cultural history or natural history
• has a principal office within the district
• conducts the majority of its activities within the state of Colorado
• principally benefits the residents of the district.
Timeline for Tier III organizations
A completed eligibility application (including all attachments in numerical order) must be
submitted by early fall in order for an eligibility determination to be made prior to the following
grant cycle. Late and/or incomplete applications will not be reviewed.
Applicant organizations will receive notification of the eligibility determination by mail after SCFD
has conducted a thorough review of the organization. Eligibility confirmation may take anywhere
Page 19
from a few weeks to several months depending on the complexity of the organization and the
volume of other requests the SCFD is processing.
Organizations must obtain eligibility confirmation before they may apply for funding. Eligibility
does not guarantee funding of an organization.
RESOURCES
http://scfd.org
http://scfd.org/graphics/uploads/Files/annual_report/2012_SCFD_Report.pdf
http://www.westaf.org/assets/pdf/historyofscfd.pdf
http://ip-208-109-123-189.ip.secureserver.net/downloads/DecGFR00_DenverArtDistrictTax.pdf
Page 20
HOUSTON ARTS ALLIANCE
HOUSTON, TX
OVERVIEW
Founded in 2006, the Houston Arts Alliance (HAA) is a 501C3 non-profit arts organization. Its
mission is to support and promote artistic life in the Houston region through programs, initiatives
and alliances. HAA is a conduit, a partner and an advocate, a think tank for the arts and a catalyst
for new initiatives. Houston Arts Alliances serves the City of Houston by managing the City’s art
collection, which holds more than 450 works. Using a city ordinance, put into place in 1999, HAA
commissions new public art for the city. In addition, HAA distributes over $3,000,000.00 annually
in grants to arts organizations and individual artists, using city revenue that comes from Hotel
Occupancy Taxes. Providing resources to develop artists and their organizations, as well as
supporting the creative process, allows HAA to enhance and sustain the City of Houston worldrenowned city of the arts.
HISTORY
In 2006 Mayor Bill White founded Houston Arts Alliance (HAA). HAA was been officially formed
through the merger of the Cultural Arts Council Houston/Harris County, the Municipal Art
Commission, and the Civic Art Committee. HAA is a conduit, a partner and an advocate, a think
tank for the arts, and a catalyst for new initiatives. Houston Arts Alliances serves the City of
Houston by managing the City’s art collection, which holds more than 400 works. Using a city
ordinance put into place in 1999, HAA commissions new public art for the city. In addition, HAA
distributes over $10,000,000.00 annually in grants to arts organizations and individual artists, using
city revenue that comes from Hotel Occupancy Taxes.
HAA’s predecessor agency, the Cultural Arts Council of Houston/Harris County was founded in
1977. Funding for this agency was provided by a 1 cent increase in the existing hotel occupancy
tax. The organization, which began as a formula regrantor of these occupancy taxes, expanded its
services in the 1980s to include public art, development of theatre space, research, cultural
calendar, and other publications. The grants program was also subsequently expanded.
•
•
•
•
General Operating Support Grants: This program provides grants for operating support to
organizations in existence for three years or more and with budgets of $50,000 or more. It has
been in place since 2006, during which time it has provided 485 awards giving over $2 million
to organizations.
Arts Project Grants: This program provides project grants to organizations with budgets of
$50,000 or less and to non-arts organizations. This program has been in place since 2006,
during which time it has provided 184 awards giving over $750,000 to organizations.
Touring and Neighborhood Arts: This program supports presenting and touring of arts
programs by small and mid-sized organizations based outside of Houston. It has been in place
since 2006, during which time it has provided 181 awards giving over $490,000 to
organizations.
Individual Artist Grants: HAA began offering grants to artists in 1985 with the establishment
of the Creative Artists Program (re-named Individual Artist Grant Program in the 1990s). The
Page 21
goal then and now is to promote awareness of the contributions that Houston artists make to
the community. Since 1985, over $2 million in grants have been awarded to over 587 Houston
artists through the program.
(Note that the statistics provided here are since the founding of HAA. These grants programs were
in existence under HAA’s predecessor agency, the Cultural Arts Council of Houston/Harris
County, but data is not readily available for those years.)
GRANTS PROGRAMS
Houston Arts Alliance provides grants annually to over 250 arts and cultural organizations and
artists through a competitive grant allocation process. As most of HAA’s funding comes from the
City of Houston Hotel Occupancy Tax, grants are awarded for the encouragement, promotion,
improvement and application of the arts to promote tourism and the convention and hotel
industry.
The majority of HAA grants are specific to 501(c)(3) nonprofit arts and cultural organizations,
although small grants are available to other nonprofits that present or produce arts programs or
events in the service area consistent with the promotion and enhancement of Houston and Harris
County as a cultural destination.
HAA has established a Task Force to review the current grant programs, including a review of
guidelines, online applications, and funding allocations. This Task Force includes selected grantees,
other funders, members of the Board, and HAA staff. The review, which took place during
summer of 2011, was deemed necessary to ensure that granting programs, which were established
years ago, are designed to best meet the needs of today’s cultural sector. Current grants programs
for organizations include:
•
General Operating Support: General Operating Support category is open only to nonprofit
arts and cultural organizations with prior two year average cash revenues in excess of $50,000
as determined by their IRS 990s. Organizations must have been in existence for a minimum of
three years prior to application date and have completed two previous HAA Arts Project
Grants. The General Operating Support category provides financial support to aid arts and
cultural organizations to present or produce arts and cultural programs that serve
to: (1)establish a nationally recognized cultural environment that attracts visitors and tourists to
the arts presentations and exhibitions to City of Houston; and (2)meet the needs of the
culturally diverse residents and visitors of Houston. Most grants awarded in the General
Operating Support and General Operating Support Expansion range between $2,000 and
$40,000. The maximum amount awarded for a General Operating Support or General
Operating Support Expansion grant is $100,000. HAA offers two types of general operating
grants:
o General Operating Support: provides operating support for arts and cultural
organizations that present regular seasons of arts or cultural programs that serve
residents, visitors, and tourists to Houston. While the grants are awarded for operating
support, grantees are required to spend the grant funds only for arts programs that
serve to promote tourism and the convention and hotel industry (the allowed purposes
of the Hotel Occupancy Tax).
Page 22
•
•
•
•
o General Operating Support Expansion: provides operating support for
multicultural arts organizations that are devoted to primarily providing art to minority,
inner-city, tribal or disabled communities and that present a regular season of arts or
cultural programs that serve residents, visitors, and tourists to Houston. While the
grants are awarded for operating support, grantees are required to spend the grant
funds only for arts programs that serve to promote tourism and the convention and
hotel industry (the allowed purposes of the Hotel Occupancy Tax).
Arts Project Grants: This category is used to fund arts organizations with two year average
cash revenues of less than $50,000 as demonstrated by their IRS 990 reports. It is also open to
university/college and educational agencies and departments, and non-arts nonprofits. The
purpose of the Arts Project Grants category is to assist nonprofit organizations in producing
and presenting arts and cultural projects that are open to the general public and that contribute
to making Houston a more attractive cultural destination. For purposes of this category, the
proposed project must have a distinct focus, timeline and/or date and budget. Types of eligible
projects include one time or series of public performances or exhibitions; creation of new
work; artists’ residencies; lecture/demonstrations; and services to the field that meet the City of
Houston Hotel Occupancy Tax requirements as previously described. Project grants are not
intended to provide general operating or year-round support. A series of events or festival
(defined as multiple performances or events in one day or longer that share a common theme
or purpose) may qualify. The maximum request is 50% of a project’s actual expenses up to
$10,000, not to exceed 25% of the organization’s average of previous two year’s cash revenues
as verified by IRS 990s. Most grants awarded in the Arts Project Grant program range between
$2,000 and $5,000.
Touring and Neighborhood Arts: To assist arts and cultural organizations throughout Harris
County, Houston Arts Alliance offers support through its Touring/Neighborhood Arts Project
grants. These grants (maximum of $3,000) assist organizations in providing arts programming
primarily outside the City of Houston in Harris County. Funded by Harris County and Texas
Commission on the Arts, this grants program seeks to support the presenting and touring of
arts programs, with an emphasis on small and mid-size arts organizations. Applications are
accepted two times per year. Applicants must have been in existence for one full year, must
have at least a one year history of touring or presenting public arts and cultural programs, and
must offer events open to the general public. In general, the Touring & Neighborhood Arts
Program will give priority to applications from organizations with operating budgets under
$300,000 and organizations that are based in Harris County outside the City of Houston. Nonarts nonprofit organizations are eligible to apply to present professional artists in any art form
for activities such as performances, workshops, exhibitions, readings, and residencies designed
for community audiences. Eligible program and performance sites include, but are not limited
to: community centers, senior centers, public libraries, public parks, theaters and civic
auditoriums.
The Arts Marketing Grant (AMG) Program provides funding to nonprofit organizations in
the City of Houston who are currently FY13 General Operating Support (GOS) or General
Operating Support Expansion (GOSE) grantees - with the purpose of promoting Houston as a
tourism destination. Awards are in the amount of up to $20,000.
The City's Initiative (CI) Program provides a one-time grant to City of Houston nonprofit
arts or cultural organizations for special opportunities that are not part of the applicant's
annual budget or regular programming/annual events. An example could be the opportunity to
Page 23
present an artist or performance that was not included in an annual season; unanticipated
invitation to perform or exhibit as part of conference or meeting being held in Houston; or the
opportunity for one-time exposure in a national or regional media campaign. Awards are
restricted to artistic and marketing costs, with a maximum available of $10,000.
In addition, HAA provides grants to individual artists through the Individual Artist Grant
Program. The Individual Artist Grant (IAG) Program seeks to support the development and
presentation of new artistic works by local Houston artists to help advance Houston's reputation as
a vibrant creative hub and a destination for cultural tourism. IAG provides New Works Fellowship
opportunities through a competitive application and review process. Applications for these grants
are reviewed by external peer review panels composed of inclusive groups of artists, arts
professionals and community volunteers selected for their expertise and objectivity.
GRANTS REVIEW PROCESS
Applications for these grants are reviewed by external peer review panels, composed of inclusive
groups of artists, arts administrators, finance professionals, business people, community volunteers
and others, selected for their expertise and objectivity and reflective of the diversity of our
community.
Arts professionals and organizations from every discipline are invited to submit nominations for
peer review panelists for Houston Arts Alliance Programs. Peer review panels assist in evaluating
applications for arts and cultural organizations and creative artists, which are funded by Houston
Arts Alliance. Nominations for review panelists may be made by any arts and cultural organization
or individual. Interested individuals may also nominate themselves. Panelists are selected according
the following criteria established and approved by the Board.
Panel meetings are open to the public for observation only (with the exception of Individual Artist
Grant panels, which are not open). All applicants are required to have an informed
representative(s) attend their review time. If representatives cannot be present, they must make
arrangements with HAA at least 24 hours in advance to be available by phone during the panel
meeting. The representative(s) must be able to answer questions about the organization’s
operations and programs, budget and finances, and the specifics of the application. Arts Project
Grant panels were executed by an online panel in FY12 in which case, applicants were not required
to attend the panel process.
No Conflict of Interest – Panelists may not review applications from organizations and/or
individuals with which they are associated and must disclose all conflicts with the Houston Arts
Alliance. Conflicts of interest include fiduciary, personal, professional or adversarial relationships
of the panelist and his/her family.
Once the applications have gone through the Peer Panel Review process, the panelists’
recommendations are forwarded to Houston Arts Alliance’s Grants & Services Committee to
finalize and approve funding recommendations which are then forwarded to the Board of
Directors for final approval. Notifications are sent to the applicants once the final decision by the
Board of Directors is made.
Page 24
The only exception to this panel review process is the Special Initiatives Program. Each
complete and eligible application is forwarded to the HAA Grants Committee. This committee,
comprised of members who are experienced in the arts and nonprofit management, reviews the
application, recommends whether or not to fund, and if so, at what amount. The recommendation
is ratified by Houston Arts Alliance Board of Directors and is forwarded to the Mayor’s Office.
The Mayor’s Office makes the final decision.
SOURCES OF FUNDING
Funding for Houston Arts Alliance’s General Operating Support, General Operating Support
Expansion and Arts Project Grant, Special Initiatives, and Individual Artist Grant categories is provided
by the City of Houston utilizing Hotel Occupancy Tax (HOT). Each year, the City allocates 19.3% of
the municipal Hotel Occupancy Tax receipts to support arts and cultural organizations, as permitted by
the Texas Tax Code, through an annual agreement with Houston Arts Alliance. Per state law, revenue
from the municipal Hotel Occupancy Tax may be used only to promote tourism and the convention
and hotel industry. Organizations applying for and receiving Hotel Occupancy Tax funds are required to
adhere to the state laws governing the use of such funds. Only organizations based in the City of
Houston are eligible to receive Hotel Occupancy Tax funds. Among the permitted uses of HOT monies
are the following related to arts and cultural activity:
• The encouragement, promotion, improvement, and application of the arts, including
instrumental and vocal music, dance, drama, folk art, creative writing, architecture, design and
allied fields, painting, sculpture, photography, graphic and craft arts, motion pictures, radio,
television, tape and sound recording, and other arts related to the presentation, performance,
execution, and exhibition of these major art forms [Texas Tax Code Section 351.101(a) (4)].
• Historical restoration and preservation projects or activities or advertising and conducting
solicitations and promotional programs to encourage tourists and convention delegates to visit
preserved historic sites or museums at or in the immediate vicinity of convention center facilities
or visitor information centers or located elsewhere in the municipality or its vicinity that would
be frequented by tourists and convention delegates [Texas Tax Code Section 351.101(a)(5)].
Funding for Touring and Neighborhood Grants is provided by Harris County and the Texas
Commission on the Arts.
The hotel/motel tax funds that are used to fund the other grants programs are allocated amongst the
different programs based on history and size of applicant pool. As of 2011, generally, $180,000 is
allocated each year to fund Individual Artist Grants and the remaining funds are allocated 65% to
General Operating Support, 28% to General Operating Support Expansion, and 7& to Arts Project
grants. These ratios are subject to revision in the future based on the work of the Task Force described
above.
ADVOCACY
As a 501C3, non-profit organization, HAA is committed to educating elected officials at all levels
of government to the importance of the arts. However, a 501C3 organization is prohibited from
advocacy activities, and therefore that work is often directed to a 501C4 with a similar or
compatible mission. In Houston, Texans for the Arts (TFA) is the designated agent for advocacy at
the state level regarding the safeguarding of Hotel Occupancy Tax (HOT) legislation – the primary
source of public arts support in Houston.
Page 25
RESOURCES
http://www.houstonartsalliance.com/
http://www.houstonartsalliance.com/grants/
Page 26
PITTSBURGH, PA
Pittsburgh has two funding models of note that support the activities of the cultural sector in the
city, one of which is focused on economic development and facility management and the other
that provides a dedicated funding stream for cultural organizations. Together these entities support
Pittsburgh’s thriving cultural sector.
THE PITTSBURGH CULTURAL TRUST
PITTSBURGH, PA
OVERVIEW
The Pittsburgh Cultural Trust offers a model of a nonprofit arts organization that is a driving
catalyst behind the ongoing development of the Downtown Pittsburgh Cultural District. This
organization is multi-faceted, including a performance arts presenter, a theater/galleries
owner/operator, a catalyst for Cultural District real estate development, and an arts collaborator.
Some of its funds are derived from real estate development.
HISTORY AND PROGRAM
The Pittsburgh Cultural Trust, a nonprofit arts organization, is a driving catalyst behind the
ongoing development of the Downtown Pittsburgh Cultural District, Pittsburgh. The Trust is a
multi-faceted organization, including a performance arts presenter, a theater/galleries
owner/operator, a catalyst for Cultural District real estate development, and an arts collaborator.
What is perhaps most unique about the Cultural Trust is the role it has played in downtown
development. The late H.J. "Jack" Heinz had a vision for a dynamic downtown, flourishing year
round with activity and millions of theatergoers, arts enthusiasts, employees, tourists, students and
residents. Over the past two decades, The Pittsburgh Cultural Trust has steadily changed the face
of downtown by building arts venues, making investments as a catalyst for private investment, and
restoring historic properties with a high standard of aesthetic design and quality. Among the 1.2
million square feet of property the Trust manages are now close to two dozen, and counting,
world-class theaters and small, unique spaces. These venues are integral to the economic and
cultural growth of Pittsburgh's Cultural District.
In 1989 a plan was commissioned by The Pittsburgh Cultural Trust and the city's Urban
Redevelopment Authority, with assistance from the Allegheny Conference on Community
Development and the City Planning Department, to define the vision for the Cultural District and
to identify the steps required to realize this vision. The plan was built on the foundation of the
District's major performance facilities - Heinz Hall, Benedum Center for the Performing Arts, and
the Byham Theater - and key projects already underway at that time, including streetscape
improvements, Byham Theater renovations, conceptual design of the O'Reilly Theater, and
restorations to buildings in the historic section of the Cultural District.
Page 27
In June 2005, delegates of Shaping the Vision, a forum hosted by The Pittsburgh Cultural Trust,
gathered to brainstorm the initial steps for the Trust's next major project -- the Cultural District
Riverfront Development. Dozens of leaders in the fields of architecture, urban planning, and
redevelopment from around the globe explored potential concepts for the prime real estate
bordered by Penn Avenue and Fort Duquesne Boulevard, between Seventh and Ninth Streets.
The Real Estate Development Department of the Trust, in collaboration with the Education and
Community Engagement Department, Theater Operations, and Institutional Development,
completed a new Education Center and multiuse space in the James E. Rohr Building at 805-809
Liberty Avenue that includes the Peirce Studio, a sizable multipurpose room located on the first
floor, as well as the PNC Grow Up Great Classroom and several other classrooms and workshop
spaces to utilize for visual and theater arts, written and spoken word, dance and other art forms.
Today Pittsburgh's Cultural District is a great success with new cultural facilities, public open
spaces and amenities projects, and countless commercial developments. Pittsburgh's Downtown
Cultural District is a fourteen-square block area bordered by the Allegheny River
With the infrastructure firmly in place, the focus is now on residential living in the Cultural
District. The Encore on Seventh by Lincoln Property at the corner of Seventh Street and Fort
Duquesne Boulevard opened in 2006 as the first new high-rise residential project in the last thirty
five years in Downtown Pittsburgh. The building provides spectacular riverfront and city views
and is a significant precursor of great new residential projects and public realm improvements.
Other initiatives include:
• Collaboration on construction of the Creative and Performing Arts High School of the
City of Pittsburgh
• Initializing residential developments throughout the Cultural District
• Supporting new hotel developments, including the Renaissance Hotel and the Courtyard by
Marriott
• Constructing and maintaining important public realm improvements
• Supporting several new storefront arts projects
• Constructing and supporting new parking facilities
• Supporting new retail efforts, including numerous new restaurants
RESOURCES
http://www.trustarts.org/about
http://issuu.com/culturaltrust/docs/2013_annual_report
ALLEGHENY REGIONAL ASSET DISTRICT
PITTSBURGH, PA
OVERVIEW
The Allegheny Regional Asset District (RAD) is a special purpose area-wide unit of local
government that was authorized by an act of the Pennsylvania Legislature in 1993 to distribute half
Page 28
of the proceeds from a 1% sales and use tax to recreation, cultural, sports and civic facilities and
programs. Since 1995, the District has awarded $1.2 billion in grants, including $61.2 million in
capital grants for projects like accessibility, critical infrastructure, and equipment.
HISTORY
In the early 1990s, the City of Pittsburgh found itself providing a disproportionate amount of
funding for the region’s arts, cultural and recreational activities. At the same time, leaders saw the
need to move away from property tax as the main source of funding municipal and county
functions, and to provide a local tax relief program for low income senior citizens.
In 1991, the Pittsburgh mayor asked the Allegheny Conference on Community Development to
address the issue of funding for area recreational facilities, cultural institutions and libraries. In
response, the Conference proposed a legislative effort to stabilize funding for the regional assets,
correct funding inequities, reduce reliance on property taxes, and establish a precedent for regional
cooperation.
With bi-partisan support, the legislature in 1993 approved creation of the first regional
mechanism—the Allegheny Regional Asset District—to address tax reform and to stabilize
funding for important regional institutions, or “assets.” Act 77 provides for the enactment of a 1%
county sales tax collected by the State Department of Revenue under the same rules as the state
sales tax. The County Commissioners levied the tax and created the District in March of 1994.
Every municipal government in Allegheny County voted to participate in the benefits of the new
tax. The District itself does not have taxing power and the County government cannot increase the
tax under existing law.
The sole source of funding for the district is this 1 percent sales tax. The Allegheny Regional Asset
District Board awards grants from one-half of the proceeds of the funds collected. The other half
of the tax proceeds go directly to county and municipal governments. It is estimated that 25
percent of the collected tax comes from individuals outside Allegheny County who come to work,
shop, and use the regional assets funded by the tax. The tax is easy to collect and administer
because it is an add-on to the existing state sales tax.
The Allegheny County Regional Asset District is a unique national model of combining tax relief,
support for regional assets, and funding for municipal expenses. The creation of the District
provided a county-wide vehicle for county/city cooperation and ended attempts to shift asset
funding responsibilities from one level of government to another. The District gives a way for
providing public support that is fair and equitable.
GRANTS PROGRAMS
The Allegheny Regional Asset District (RAD) grants are distributed to civic, cultural and
recreational entities, libraries, parks, and sports facilities. The distribution is made by a Board of
Directors composed of four persons appointed by the County Chief Executive, two appointed by
the Mayor of Pittsburgh, and one person elected by the six appointees. The Board also appoints a
27 person Advisory Board to provide public input and comment on policies and procedures. The
District has an annual budget process ending with a budget adoption in December for the
following year. Each proposed allocation requires the support of six members. All meetings and
Page 29
votes of the Board are conducted under the provisions of the Sunshine Act which requires public
meetings and opportunities for public comment.
For 2011, the District adopted an $81.1 million budget serving 91 assets; some 32% of the funding
went to support libraries, 31% to parks, trails and other green spaces, 18% to the stadiums and
arena, 8% to regional facilities (Zoo, Aviary, Phipps Conservatory), and 10% went to arts and
cultural organizations. Less than 1% is to be spent on administration. Nine regional assets are
contractual assets and have been given guaranteed funding for a period of five years (2010-2015).
The District will support three grant categories in 2011:
•
•
•
•
Contractual Assets - organizations selected in 1994 for 10-year funding commitments that
were reauthorized for five additional years in 2005 and in 2010. These contractual assets
include Allegheny County Library Association, Allegheny County Regional Parks, the
Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh, Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh, City of McKeesport
Regional Park, City of Pittsburgh Regional Park, The National Aviary in Pittsburgh, Phipps
Conservatory and Botanical Gardens, Pittsburgh Zoo and PPC Aquarium. Total awarded
for 2011 is $60 million.
Annual Assets - organizations that apply for support on an annual basis. Total awarded in
2011 is $5.6 million, including $401,000 for capital projects.
Multi-Year Assets - grants with commitments for more than one year of commitments
beyond the contractual asset period, including Sports and Exhibition Authority debt
financing and arena debt service. Total awarded in 2011 is $14 million.
In 2009, the District created the first Connection Grants to foster collaborative efforts
among assets that will lower overhead costs. The first grants were funded in 2010.
Funding for 2011 is $250,000.
Allocation of funds between grant categories is a board decision. Initially, the annual grants
category grew as a faster as a percent of budget, but in recent years, the allocation has been more
consistent.
The following are descriptions of the programs that are open to applicants:
•
Annual Grants: Annual grants are of two types:
o Category A provides operating support for ongoing activities of the organization
o Category B provides capital maintenance for repair of existing facilities; accessibility
improvements; new equipment or repairs to equipment.
Applicants must be governmental entities or non-profit, tax-exempt corporations, duly organized
and in good standing under Pennsylvania laws, and provide programming or services of a regional
nature in Allegheny County. Act 77 prohibits the District from funding: any health care facility;
institutions of elementary, secondary or higher education; any park less than 200 acres except for
linear parks located in more than one municipality; any asset which fails to serve a significant
number of residents outside of the municipality in which the asset is located; any library which is
not part of a library system serving multiple municipalities. In addition, the Annual Grants
Program in the past has not provided funding for: governmental-type services other than
Page 30
qualifying parks (examples include public safety and public works programs); local recreation
programs, such as teams and leagues; economic and housing development agencies and programs;
social/human service agencies and programs; parades, single or short term events or festivals;
project grants for planning or feasibility studies; historical monuments unless part of an otherwise
eligible regional asset. Beginning with year 2011 funding, all applications must submit a Boardapproved Diversity Plan.
o Connection Grants: The goal of the Connection Grants program is to support the
implementation of a range of collaborative efforts that will lower overhead costs thereby
sustaining and enhancing public programming. Connections Grant applications are
accepted on an on-going basis and are reviewed quarterly until committed funds have been
exhausted for the year. Connection Grants are one time project grants designed to directly
assist in the implementation of asset connections including the following (additional
qualifications on the application form):
o Actual merger of assets resulting in a reduction of overhead costs or that will
otherwise sustain the asset’s level of service to the community.
o Agreements between or among assets to share a significant portion of
administrative costs and or facilities for a minimum of three years.
o Collaborative projects expected to result in continuing revenue enhancement
and/or expenditure control. One-time programming or marketing projects without
ongoing economic benefit to assets are not eligible.
Connection Grants may be used to pay for any costs associated with the project. While
requests for funds to develop business/implementation plans will be considered, the
District expects that these grants will lead to actual results rather than the production of
feasibility or conceptual studies. Nine Connections grants have been awarded since the
inception of the program.
GRANTS REVIEW PROCESS
RAD has an annual budget process that begins with the application process (applications are
typically available in June) and ends with a budget adoption in December for the following year.
Each proposed allocation requires the support of six members. All meetings and votes of the
Board are conducted under the provisions of the Sunshine Act which requires public meetings and
opportunities for public comment. All applications are public record. From time to time RAD will
offer special project based grants. Currently the District is offering Connection Grants to
encourage assets to share resources and lower overhead costs.
The distribution is made by a Board of Directors composed of four persons appointed by the
County Chief Executive, two appointed by the Mayor of Pittsburgh and one person elected by the
six appointees. The six appointees serve terms concurrent with the appointing authority while the
seventh member serves for two years. The Board of Directors appoints a 27 person Advisory
Board to provide public input and comment on policies and procedures.
ADVOCACY
Although the law does not require “renewal,” the District does have a communications program
designed to keep the public informed about the impact of the program. For example, RAD
Page 31
sponsors an annual event called Radical Days where assets open their doors free to the public as a
way to thank them for their support.
RESOURCES
http://www.radworkshere.org/pages/about-us
CONNECTION BETWEEN RAD AND CULTURAL TRUST
The Regional Asset District is committed to fostering connections between and among regional
assets. To encourage these connections, the District has supported asset mergers in the past by
combining and sustaining the operating grants of the two merging organizations. Often funders
decrease support when a merger occurs. The only asset to receive an increase in RAD funding in
2010 was the Heinz History Center which has taken over operations of the Ft. Pitt Museum. In
2009, the District launched a new funding program, Connections Grants, designed to fund the
implementation of a range of new collaborative efforts (such as shared services and mergers)
thereby sustaining and enhancing programming. Connection Grants are one time project grants.
The Pittsburgh Cultural Trust, a RAD-funded asset since 1995, has prioritized achieving such
connections through multiple efforts, including the shared services, mergers and marketing
assistance to other arts and culture organizations. The Trust’s Shared Services Initiative began in
2000 as an effort to improve the financial condition of the Cultural District organizations through
collaborative sourcing of commodities, services, and joint marketing efforts that lead to increased
ticket sales. The initiative is housed at the Trust utilizing its existing infrastructure. Cultural
District organizations agreed on a single solution to ticketing and customer relationship
management, known as Tessitura. The Tessitura Consortium now boasts 10 organizations, 400
users and processes over $82 million worth of transactions annually. “The Shared Services
Initiative has been a great addition for the Pittsburgh CLO,” said Cindy Opatick, Associate
Producer at the CLO. “We have experienced a cost savings in almost all departments. For the
marketing department, the shared database has added another level to our Customer Relationship
Management system.”
Since its inception, the Trust has also merged with four nonprofits: the Pittsburgh Dance Council,
First Night Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh International Children’s Theater and Festival, and the Dollar
Bank Three Rivers Arts Festival. While the Trust incurred additional costs during the initial
integration period, over time, new efficiencies have been created. In addition, as a steward of the
downtown Cultural District, the Trust assists (via direct subsidy, support and/or marketing
assistance) over 1000 individual artists and arts organizations each year.
The Cultural District organizations (August Wilson Center for African American Culture,
Pittsburgh Ballet Theatre, Pittsburgh CLO, Pittsburgh Opera, Pittsburgh Public Theater,
Pittsburgh Symphony and The Pittsburgh Cultural Trust) receive annual operating support grants
from RAD each year.
Page 32
ZOO MUSEUM DISTRICT
ST. LOUIS, MO
OVERVIEW
Founded in 1972, the Metropolitan Zoological Park and Museum District (ZMD) was created,
funded by property taxes from both the City and the County of St. Louis. During its years of
operation, the District’s annual tax revenue has increased from $3.9 million dollars in 1972 to more
than $72 million dollars in 2009. These funds now cover a significant percentage of each
institution’s operating costs. In recent years, approximately 85% of the tax revenues come from
the County taxpayers while City residents provide 15% of the District's tax revenues. Over $1.3
billion has been raised through this District since its inception forty years ago.
The expansion of the number of Sub-districts from three to five is indicative of the success and
vitality of the original concept of a tax supported cultural district. Currently the Sub-districts
include the St. Louis Art Museum, the St. Louise Zoo, the Missouri Botanical Garden, the St.
Louis Science Center, and the Missouri History Museum. Admission to four of the five
participating institutions is free every day; the fifth gives a discount to District residents. Today, the
Metropolitan Zoological Park and Museum District is, perhaps, the largest tax supported cultural
district in this country.
HISTORY
In the late 1960s, a group of public-spirited citizens, under the leadership of Howard Baer, sought
to establish a cultural district, funded by property taxes from both the City and the County of St.
Louis. At that time, the St. Louis Zoo and Art Museum received tax support only from the City of
St. Louis. The Science Center (formerly the Museum of Science & Natural History) received no
tax support.
Circuit Judge Thomas F. McGuire, Howard Baer’s successor as Chairman of the Zoo, helped the
group propose the statute that established the District. Through the passionate efforts of Mr.
Baer, Zoo Director Marlin Perkins and other prominent St. Louisans, H.B. 23 was enacted by the
Legislature. H.B. 23 authorized City and County residents to vote on a tax levy of up to 8 cents
per $100 assessed valuation for the operation of the Zoo and the Art Museum and 4 cent per $100
assessed valuation for the Science Center (Sec. 184.350-.384 R.S.Mo. 1969). As the result of a
successful vote, the Metropolitan Zoological Park and Museum District was created.
The voters of St. Louis City and County allowed the Botanical Garden to become the group’s
fourth Sub-district in 1983; the Missouri History Museum entered the District in 1988.
In recent years, there have been ongoing discussions about the possibility of expanding the tax
base of the District to include nearby counties (and possibly even part of the state of Illinois),
whose residents are able to take advantage of the programs of the world-renowned District
institutions. However, to date there has been little consensus about this idea, despite the fact that
District revenues over the past few years have been level with little hope of increasing.
Page 33
GRANTS PROGRAMS
The amount allocated to each institution is pre-determined by the tax rates approved by residents.
Institution
Saint Louis Zoo
Saint Louis Art Museum
Saint Louis Science
Center
Missouri Botanical
Garden
Missouri History
Museum
Maximum
Authorized
Property Tax Rate
8 cents
8 cents
Annual Tax
Revenues
$20 million
$20 million
4 cents
$10 million
4 cents
$10 million
4 cents
$10 million
GRANTS REVIEW PROCESS
The District is comprised of a governing body of eight Commissioners. Four members
(representing the City of St. Louis) are appointed by the Mayor and four members (representing St.
Louis County) are appointed by the County Executive. Over the years of the District, over 40
citizens have served on the Commission, serving as stewards of the funds and ensuring that funds
are efficiently spent to enhance institutional quality and access.
In addition, each Sub-district also has a ten-member Commission (five from the City selected by
the Mayor and five from the County selected by the County Executive). These Commissions also
monitor how taxpayer funds are spent. The District and Sub-district Commissions are proud that
taxpayer funds have been consistently handled and spent with the highest integrity and without
financial incident for the entire history of the Metropolitan Zoological Park and Museum District.
Only a minute portion of the District’s tax collections, less than six tenths of one percent (0.6%),
has been expended for administration
ADVOCACY
Because the Zoo Museum District involves expenditure of taxpayer funds, advocacy regarding the
importance of the District institutions and the value of this funding steam is ongoing, both on the
part of the institutions themselves and by the District. The local, national, and even international
prominence of the five Sub-districts and their role in both serving residents and attracting visitors
to the region is an ongoing message.
RESOURCES
http://www.mzdstl.org/about.html
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/article_c0180fa4-08ff-581d-bd1579649684d0dd.html
http://www.mzdstl.org/News/ZMD35thAnniversaryReport.pdf
Page 34