San Francisco

During the San Francisco Bay Area's economic boom of the late 1990s and 2000, rising real estate costs challenged its artists and destabilized a number of key arts organizations. The dance field was particularly hard-hit when two important studios containing teaching, performance, and rehearsal spaces closed.

Dance/USA, a national service organization representing professional dance, has collected data from its member companies since 1982. For the past ten years, led by Director of Research John Munger, it has published an annual report on the "state of the dance field." In 2000, facing a time of change and opportunity in the funding landscape, (including then-growing foundation assets and the possibility of gaining perspective on the impact of the mid-1990s changes to the NEA's grantmaking policies), Dance/USA sought to take a closer look at the needs of dance organizations and dancers. It reached beyond its membership to collect data, expanded research methods to include interviews and focus groups as well as surveys, and focused in-depth attention on the dynamics and systems of specific regions.

The first report developed through this expanded research effort, "Dance in the San Francisco Bay Area: A Needs Assessment," was published in May 2002 and was written by John Munger and Libby Smigel. It focuses on the San Francisco Bay Area both as a whole and as divided into four smaller regions — North Bay (Marin and Sonoma Counties), East Bay (Alameda and Contra Costa counties), San Jose (and surrounding counties), and Greater San Francisco. Dance/USA now is engaged in similar investigations of Chicago and Washington, D.C.

The Bay Area research was originally supported by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, which soon was joined by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. When the research team found it difficult to limit their interviews and still cover the region's complexity, the Fleishhacker Foundation and Walter and Elise Haas Fund provided additional support. Copies of the study may be requested from Dance/USA (202) 833-1717. The executive summary, “Securing the Rungs of the Ladder,” appears in the September 2002 Dance/USA Journal alongside John Munger's report on the 2000 member survey.

Researchers mailed 712 survey instruments to 650 dance-making entities. They received back and analyzed 129 usable survey returns and conducted 56 interviews (both face-to-face and in focus groups) with dancers, university representa- tives, presenters, funders, and dance company administrators. The published assessment compares data among the four regions and for artists working in different dance traditions. (Among those responding to the survey, 46 percent work in modern dance, 38 percent in ethnic forms, 5 percent in ballet, and 11 percent in “other” or cross-disciplinary forms.)

As someone reading about my local community, I was struck by the sheer scope of activity sponsored by a large number of small dance companies and independent choreographers, and by the financial struggles faced by dancers and choreographers. Only ten out of the 127 persons responding to the survey indicated that they supported themselves solely from the activities of their dance companies. Many surveyed play multiple roles within their organizations and hold multiple jobs to make ends meet.

In addition to challenges for individual artists, the gap between large and small organizations is profound. The Bay Area is home to the San Francisco Ballet, the nation's second largest ballet company, as well as to other important, widely recognized large and mid-sized dance organizations. The five largest dance companies in the region represent only 4 percent of the survey sample, but their combined budgets exceed the total budgets of all other Bay Area dance companies combined.

The region is home to one of the nation's largest ethnic and non-Western dance communities. (There is disagreement about what to call this constituency although the term “ethnic dance” seems to prevail regionally because of a long running, highly regarded annual ethnic dance festival.) San Jose has a particularly vibrant cadre of ethnic dance companies. A strong theme emerging in the survey was the lack of recognition for and understanding of this important aspect of the dance field.

Some years ago the Bay Area's dance service organization closed, and many survey respondents indicated a need for information, referrals, workshops, advocacy, and other services that a well-designed organization could provide. Many respondents also cried out for affordable rehearsal, workshop, and presenting space and some believed that the need for services, for festival or workshop presenting opportunities, and for affordable space might be provided by a single entity. Because the venues that were lost in recent years were based in San Francisco, I was surprised that the East Bay (Oakland-Berkeley) was most often cited as the part of the region that urgently needed a new 200 to 400-seat theater.

The lack of supportive services and physical space are just two factors aggravating the community's greatest need: what might be called “the need to develop” or, in Munger and Smigel's terms, “secure the rungs in the ladder.” At the level of creating new dances, more attention to and support for development is needed. Many believe that work is being presented before it is ready because the artists cannot afford adequate development time and space. In addition, the region lacks a clear system of support for artistic and organizational development. Fellowship opportunities are limited. As mentioned above, the major organizations (some of which struggle in their own right) dominate the dance economy. Some funding is available for emerging artists but most of it is project-related, not for operating costs. Small and small-to-mid-sized groups find it extremely difficult to “move up” their companies into slightly larger and better supported situations in which the artists may be able to afford staff or professional help with fundraising, accounting, or marketing. This appears to be true in spite of the region's remarkably loyal general operating support resources (such as the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and Grants for the Arts of the San Francisco Hotel Tax Fund).

Nevertheless, in spite of a challenging environment, the region attracts and retains dance artists. Many dancers and choreographers surveyed appear to be deeply rooted in the Bay Area. The average professional experience of the dance artists responding to the survey was twenty-one years and the average duration of their professional careers spent in the Bay Area was fifteen and a half years.

In many respects the Bay Area's story aligns with the national picture drawn by Dance/USA's annual member surveys. Its distinctive qualities may be the sheer size and cultural diversity of its dance community, and the acute, recent strain placed on that community by an escalating cost of living. While the local economic picture has changed significantly since this research project began in 2000, Dance/USA's portrait of the local dance field is still an arresting likeness. Alas, foundation and government resources for addressing identified needs have declined.

Frances Phillips is program officer, Walter and Elise Haas Fund and co-editor, GIA Reader