Private Foundation

Landscape dominates Oregon. Its beaches, mountains, and rivers beckon Oregonians to spend their leisure time hiking, skiing, and fishing. Many Portland residents routinely exit the city on weekends, choosing outdoors over urban culture. It is within this enticing natural environment that Portland's arts and cultural institutions must engage their audiences and make their way as financially viable institutions.

There are an abundance of theories — and even more clichés — about why the arts should be in young people's lives. However, academically rigorous research that demonstrates the power of the arts is scarce. This article summarizes a decade of research by a team of anthropologists in after-school programs identified by young people themselves as high quality. The researchers found common characteristics that made these programs successful, whether their focus was academic, sport, community service, or the arts. The balance of these characteristics differs among programs, though.

"Return with me now to those thrilling days of yesteryear

Imagine throwing an arts event and the entire community shows up. This is oftentimes what takes place in the towns delightfully portrayed in Bright Stars, a publication from the McKnight Foundation in Minneapolis, Minnesota. In Neal Cuthbert's foreword to this award-winning piece, it is underscored that rural communities in Minnesota are suffering in several ways due to listless econo-mies and dramatically shifting demographics.

Very awkward to speak politely about money in public, and yet it is so awkwardly at the heart of our culture. Here is Sophocles, in his Antigone. Creon is speaking, ironically misinterpreting the noblest of motives for the basest: "Money! There's nothing in the world so demoralizing as money. Down go your cities, Homes gone, men gone, honest hearts corrupted, Crookedness of all kinds, and all for money."

We also have Timothy from the New Testament: "The love of money is the root of all evil."

What often is lost in cultural policy conversations or research reports about the visual arts world is an examination of how ethnic-specific cultural practices and the dynamics of non-collecting museums and artist-centered organizations keep the art world from be-ing static and dull, from being victimized by the hierarchies of taste or the technocratic aims of cultural managers. Any analysis of the sociology of the visual arts field needs to speak about the relationship between the aesthetic content of a work and the contexts in which different aesthetic inquiries are supported.

Grantmakers in the Arts has been in existence for a brief two decades, and yet even within the ranks of long-time GIA conference attendees and the veterans who are among GIA's leaders today, there is no common recollection of the organization's prehistory and the moment of its founding. History generally belongs to the domain of the humanities rather than the arts, but nonetheless it is slightly embarrassing that a professional arts philanthropy organization, which has come to exercise substantial influence it its field, has no record of its founding.

Jim Collins says that greatness is not a function of circumstance. Greatness, he says, is largely a matter of conscious choice, and discipline. In his 2001 book, Good to Great ¹, Collins articulated the principles he believes differentiate companies that become great from those that do not. In his recently published monograph, "Good to Great and the Social Sectors" ², Collins addresses how these principles of greatness apply to nonprofits. Collins' framework for greatness in the social sectors encompasses five areas:

As arts funders, we often perceive our capacity to direct financial resources to worthy arts organizations as the most valuable tool at our disposal. That's probably correct and, indeed, as it should be. After all, most of our institutions have been established by donors for the core purpose of grantmaking, and the law mandates that we award grants for public benefit.

The past year has brought forward several thoughtful investigations into the future of nonprofit leadership. Among other commentaries, Investing in Leadership by Betsy Hubbard (Volume 1) and Kathleen P. Enright (Volume 2) — published by Grantmakers for Effective Organizations — and Daring to Lead, 2006, by Jeanne Bell, Richard Moyers, and Timothy Wolfred — published by CompassPoint and the Meyer Foundation — are thoughtful and meaty.