After my rant about the Heinz Endowments last week, it came as a complete but welcome surprise to read of how the Knight Foundation has changed their philosophy of giving, at least for three arts organizations in South Florida. I believe they will ultimately prove that vision always begins with common sense!….
The statement below is currently on the home page of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the same group who gave us The Search for Shining Eyes:
The Knight Arts Partnership offers to the South Florida community – to all of you – $20 million in matching grant money for the arts. We are looking for big, exciting and new ideas. There are only three rules: the ideas must be about art, the projects must take place in South Florida, and the idea must find funding to match Knight’s $20 million commitment. The initiative includes three grants totaling $20 million to establish leadership endowments for the Miami Art Museum, the Museum of Contemporary Art and the New World Symphony. See video.
For the $13 million spent on orchestras between 1994 and 2004, the foundation has little to show except for a very worthwhile report on what really doesn’t work! For this new grant program the focus shifts to a model that promotes a secure future with ideas that actually might work!
An endowment infusion will contribute income annually to each organization promoting and providing sustainability. However, the most significant element, is that new initiatives will only be funded if matching money is found. This will mean the programs are going to need the support of the community. Because of this, ideas will more likely be honed to reflect the community’s needs over an organization’s desires. Somehow I don’t think we will hear of many cupcake or massage parties!
In this Miami Herald article by Daniel Chang, Alberto Ibargüen, president and CEO of Knight Foundation states:
”Our aim,” he said, “is to prod and help create those situations where Miamians of diverse backgrounds come together, share experiences and create, in effect, a fusion culture — whatever the Miami of the future is going to be.”
This statement goes a long way to promote the idea that arts funding should be about the needs of the people each arts organization serves. I feel as though a light had just been turned on at the Knight, and that light is an audience connection!
You mention that matching funds will insure that the programs reflect community needs over organization’s desire. Is there anything that the Knight Foundation is requiring to guarantee that? Plenty of grant programs require matching funds and I don’t think that necessarily insures the community interests are represented well.
While I agree a $50,000 investment for cupcakes is rather absurd, I am surprised you are so dismissive of the idea given some of the steps you have taken to connect with your audiences. You say people are already talking at intermission. But are they talking about the performance and if so, is the discussion improving their relationship with the music and your symphony?
For new attendees, cupcakes can help remove an intimidation factor and the questions can help them understand what they just saw or are about to see. I suspect even long time attendees would find they learn something from the questions.
The biggest challenges I see are making sure the questions aren’t too esoteric or patronizingly simple. That and not burning the cupcakes.
Thanks for your comment Joe
I am not sure of if the Knight is requiring any guarantees, but the fact that each organization will need another source before the foundation will buy in to an idea, will mean they will have to come up with a program plus a convincing argument as to why it might work. With what is quoted above by their president regarding the future of the region, it sounds like the Knight is steering the arts groups towards ideas that will directly benefit their communities. At the very least the bar is set much higher when two funding groups have to agree on one program.
I am not against Cupcakes per se, just against as you put it the absurd cost. I also believe that rather than leading an entire audience to talk about our performance, I would rather they talk about whatever they want to, whilst still giving them the option to talk about what we are doing also,(I will post on another idea -that costs nothing- to do with this tomorrow). I can get 36 cupcakes for about $6, so announce that at intermission if you want to be involved in a discussion about the program the first 36 people that go to room X will get a free cupcake with a little note in it. I mean spend $6 to see if it works first before awarding $50k is what I am getting at. My belief is to make what we do fit in with them not the other way round, so that we have a chance to become relevant and flexible, suitable for everyone to enjoy. I think it should be about their needs from us, not our needs from them. Plus, making any audience development program sustainable by not having to spend huge sums of money doing it. The cost of providing free booze and food seems to always outweigh the development gained from it. As a basis, I judge the results of connecting to our audience here and our relationship with them on our attendance numbers which are close to doubling in the last 4 seasons with very minimal costs on audience development programming (the costs will be outlined in the final post of the plugging the holes series).
I don’t remember off the top of my head how much knight is giving to NWS but I do recall thinking that would have been an ideal gift to start an endowment for a professional orchestra in Miami. that’s not meant to take anything away from the accomplishments at NWS but Robert Levine had some excellent observations on that topic a few days ago: http://tinyurl.com/2ub5te