Community Foundation

Economic language and ideas have increasingly found their way into discussions of artistic value and cultural benefit. For better or for worse, the discipline of economics has been the lingua franca of public policy discourse for at least the past fifty years. Sometimes the terms resonate harshly on our ears. How do people in the world of arts and culture answer those who speak this language, who try to value cultural activity in terms of economic multipliers, cost-benefit analysis, quantitative outcome measures and, a current favorite, contingent valuation methodology?

In a crowded auditorium at Yerba Buena Center for the Arts, funders, community activists, and artists gathered in March to listen to a panel discussion on hip-hop activism in the Bay Area. The goal of Constant Elevation: The Rise of Bay Area Hip-Hop Activism was twofold: to inform and educate funders about hip-hop activism and how it fits into foundation support, and to highlight local best practices that use Hip Hop as a framework.

At the GIA conference in fall, 2002, we hosted a round table discussion with the euphemistic title "Adapting in a Time of Constraints." Essentially its burden was to ask: what should we, as funders, be doing for the cultural institutions with whom we work in the context of these extraordinarily difficult times?

Editors of the Reader invited GIA's research advisors to reflect on challenges facing arts grantmakers in light of current research findings on arts funding trends.

What do recent research findings suggest about the prospect for the support of arts and culture in the years ahead?

Ed Pauly: After a decade of dramatic growth in foundations' support for the arts, the funding news is now somber. Yet the meaning we make from the most recent study of foundation funding for the arts depends, as always, on the perspective we choose.

Recently, several studies of arts funding have been conducted in specific cities and regions. We report on a few of these here. In the winter 2002 issue of the GIA Reader Vol. 13, No. 1, Lisa Cremin and Kathie de Nobriga reported on a comparative study of arts funding in Atlanta and nineteen other cities. The report was both an inspiring and a cautionary tale for Ann McQueen and others in Boston as they planned the study that Cindy Gehrig reviews below.

2003, 79 pages. Department of Art Education, Ohio State University, 128 North Oval Mall, Room 258, Columbus, OH 43210, 614-292-5649

This final report on Transforming Education Through the Arts Challenge (TETAC) is more than a compilation of the results of a five-year initiative to link comprehensive approaches to arts education with national and local school reform efforts.

2002, 79 pages. RAND Corporation , 1700 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138 (310) 451-7002, order@rand.org

2003, 130 pages.

September 2002, 292 pages, $24.95, paper. Center for Urban Policy Research, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey. 732-932-3133, ext 555, cuprbook@rci.rutgers.edu

2001, 36 pages. Alliance for the Arts, 330 West 42nd Street, Suite 1701, New York, NY 10036, 212-947-6340

Who Pays for the Arts? is a fascinating analysis of funding trends for 575 cultural institutions in New York City from 1995-1999. Although charts, graphs, and statistics fill the study, the information they present is explained clearly and simply.