The 2009 MAP Fund online application is now open for registration.  Please keep in mind the following eligibility requirements:

• Applications must come from organizations based in the United States that have current nonprofit federal tax status - 501(c)(3). Artists or ensembles without 501(c)(3) status may apply to MAP through a fiscal sponsor.
• Organizations and artists must demonstrate at least 2 years professional experience.
• MAP supports only projects that contain a live performance.
• Eligible projects must not have premiered anywhere in the world before September 1, 2009.
• The touring or documentation of work that has already premiered is not eligible for funding.
• MAP does not fund projects whose main purpose is educational, for example art-in-the-schools or artistic training programs.
• Artists who are full-time students in degree granting programs at the time of application are not eligible.
• MAP does not fund organizations’ general operating expenses.
• MAP does not fund festivals or contests.
• Current employees or board members of Creative Capital, the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation or the Rockefeller Foundation, or immediate family members of such persons are not eligible.
• Artists who were MAP Fund recipients in 2007 and 2008 may apply again in 2010.

MAP supports most direct costs related to the conception, creation and premiere of a new work. These include but are not limited to commissioning fees and artists’ salaries, research costs, rehearsal and workshop expenses, promotion, and audience outreach and production costs up to and including the premiere run of the work.

To read more about the guidelines, visit http://www.mapfund.org/apply.html.  If you’re a fiscally sponsored project of Fractured Atlas and are interested in applying, please contact our staff at support@fracturedatlas.org.  The final day to register for the MAP fund through Fractured Atlas is December 31st.

I’m in Moncton, New Brunswick this week for the annual Canadian Public Arts Funders conference.  I’ve been invited to speak about “emerging alternatives to the traditional non-profit model” for the arts.  I warned them that all of my meager knowledge on this subject is based on US laws and tax policy, but they assured me that wasn’t a problem.  Nonetheless, I thought it would be prudent to do a few minutes of research on the legal and fiscal landscape here, so that I could competently address any big differences with the way we do things down south.

To my surprise, it appears that the laws governing charities and charitable giving in Canada are extremely similar to what we’ve got in the US.  I say this surprised me because I know they’ve got a very different ratio of public support to private support than we have.  In the US, the vast majority of support for non-profit organizations comes from private sources (e.g. individuals and foundations).  In Canada, it’s much more balanced.  (In Europe, of course, almost all support comes from public sources.)

Since I’m one of those free-market-believes-in-the-power-of-incentives kind of guys, I was expecting that the discrepancy in funding source significance would be the result of some underlying difference in tax codes or giving incentives.  But if that’s the case, then the culprit is too subtle to be revealed by my superficial research.  That’s possible, of course, but more likely there are simply different factors at work.

Could this difference simply be cultural?  Is there more of a collectivist/socialist mentality in Canada that suggests that social needs can and should be fulfilled primarily by the government?  Or perhaps the fact that public funders are comparatively generous lets private supporters off the hook.

It’s a tricky question, and I don’t have anything approaching an answer.  Regardless, it’s clear that the US model of philanthropy is ascendant and the European model in decline.  This will dismay some of us in America who have spent decades salivating over the generosity of countries like Finland.  Still, it’s the way things are headed, so we who have always lived with a quasi-market-based approach to philanthropy should be prepared to counsel and coach our peers as they detach from the government teat.

Check out this two session seminar on Monday, November 17th, 6-8:30pm and Monday, December 1st, 6-8:30pm at NYFA.

Inside the Grant Process:
From Applications to the Panel

Grants provide much needed funding, yet the process can be overwhelming. Join NYFA for a two part workshop on grant seeking, including an inside look at how a grant panel is run and decisions are made. Session one will focus on the nuts and bolts of finding grants and creating a strong application. Session two will walk through the panel process using real life examples from visual arts workshop participants. Come and see what matters when a panel sits down to vote.

Location :
New York Foundation for the Arts
155 Avenue of the Americas, 6th Floor
New York, NY 10013

Price :
$40 - covers both sessions.
Please note this workshop is geared to individual visual artists and participants are expected to come to both sessions.

RSVP :
To purchase tickets on-line please visit NYFA’s events page at events.nyfa.org.

Questions :
Contact Christa Blatchford at cblatchford@nyfa.org

The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation and the Nonprofit Finance Fund announced the first 10 grantees of their new program, “Leading for the Future: Innovative Support for Artistic Excellence.”  These are not your typical, run-of-the-mill grants, though.  Each recipient is getting $1,000,000+ over five years, combined with extensive technical assistance.  This massive injection of support is intended to make a long-term impact on the organizations’ stability and sustainability, mainly through the development of new business ideas.

Here are the happy 10:

• Alvin Ailey Dance Foundation (New York, NY), to explore a new model of online patron engagement for its celebration of African-American heritage through modern dance.Center Theatre Group (Los Angeles, CA), to explore new subscription and producing models resonant with young audiences.
• Cunningham Dance Foundation (New York, NY), to transition to a post-founder legacy period as it furthers the work of legendary choreographer Merce Cunningham.
• Jacob’s Pillow Dance (Becket, MA), to extend its impact as the longest-running dance festival in the United States by using technology to become a national resource and model.
• Misnomer Dance Theater (New York, NY), to develop new relationships between technology and dance that build on its work as a pioneer in online expression and marketing. [NOTE: I'm on their Board!]
• National Black Arts Festival (Atlanta, GA), a year-round cultural celebration of the contributions of artists of African descent, to expand the audience online for the art and performance work of education pertaining to Africa and the African Diaspora.
• Ping Chong & Company (New York, NY), to explore a new financial model by franchising a community-organizing experimental theatre project.
• SITI Company (New York, NY), to establish this ensemble-based theatre company as a resident New York City organization with relevant partnerships and support.
• Steppenwolf Theatre Company (Chicago, IL), to explore new modes of producing and engaging young audiences, including partnerships with other arts groups and universities.
• The Wooster Group (New York, NY), to explore a new producing model, pursue partnerships, and take on a new educational role in contemporary theatre.

When I first heard about this program, I figured it must be a Ben Cameron initiative.  Ben is the new-ish Program Director for the Arts at Doris Duke, but he was previously the Executive Director of Theatre Communications Group.  In that capacity, he often spoke about the need for new funding models based on broad, risk-comfortable, multi-year support (i.e. as opposed to short-term, limited support for a specific project).

This quote from the Playbill article seems to confirm this theory:

“‘Business as usual’ is no longer an option for many nonprofit arts organizations, and standard funding practices give them little room to invest in bold and experimental solutions to economic challenges,” stated Ben Cameron, director for the arts for the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. “We in the funding community must be willing to take risks to test new ideas — especially when the road gets rough — in order to secure a vibrant, sustainable future for the organizations we support.”

A one-day workshop for non-conformist performers determined to take their vision from the page to the stage. The workshop will feature a panel discussion with notable actors and writers who have seen their work produced On or Off-Broadway, and break-out groups that will provide instrumental tools to seeing one´s work produced: development, budgeting, fundraising, marketing, and more.

Presented by TeatroStageFest, HOLA, and CUNY Grad Center in association with CUNY and Instituto Cervantes.  An official event of the 2008 NYC Latin American Cultural Week.

When:  Saturday, November 8, 2008; 10:00 am - 4:00 pm

Where:  Martin E. Segal Theatre Center; CUNY Graduate Center; 365 Fifth Avenue at 34th Street

Free admission

Prior reservation required.  Reservation and Information: info@teatrostagefest.org or 212.695.4010

Schedule:

10:00 am -12:00 noon: Produce-Yourself, Introduction to Artist Driven Projects

12:00 noon - 1:30 pm: Networking Lunch.

1:30 pm - 3:00 pm:  Group discussions led by industry professionals focusing on development, identifying producers and partners, budgeting and fundraising, and public relations and marketing.

It’s a fact, most artists want to up their income.  So get out there and jump on these opportunities.  Here’s a few good ones coming up in New York.

On September 24th from 9:00am - 12:00 pm check out Introduction to Grassroots fundraising for nonprofit organizations.  Learn how to create a compelling case for support, to deliver your pitch successfully and to raise more money from more people.  Led by Judy Levine and Gregory Cohen of Cause Effective:  Nonprofit Resource Development Center, the workshop will provide practical exercises to assess and improve your organization’s grassroots fundraising success.  There is no charge for this workshop - it’s free!  Check it out on Wednesday, September 24th at the Repertory at Hostos Community College.  The address is 450 Grand Concourse in the Bronx.  To register go to https://www.nycharities.org/event/event.asp?CE_ID=2896

Also, check out Basic Finance for Artist offered by the LMCC.  It’s a free, concentrated, six-week series of workshops that will help develop financial awareness and balance through practical training in money management. The program takes into consideration the complexity of artists’ income flow and diversity of artistic practices. Workshops provide a combination of seminar-style learning and hands-on group and individual exercises. Experts in the field and guest artists help lead the workshops and address issues that are relevant to artist-specific needs.

Artists who participate in this series of workshops will gain a better understanding of their financial profiles, specific goals, and contacts with the business community and other arts professionals. Participants will also receive a resource guide that will provide exercises, reference materials, and useful tips to continue to develop their skills. Location: Lower Manhattan Cultural Council, 125 Maiden Lane, 2^nd Floor, New York. Dates and time: Mondays, 4-7 PM / October 20 - November 24, 2008.  To register, go to http://app.formassembly.com/forms/view/36988

Theatre Development Fund’s (TDF) TAP Plus program, in partnership with the New York State Council on the Arts (NYSCA), makes available grants of up to $5,000 for open captioning.  This service is provided in order to increase attendance by people who are hard of hearing or deaf at cultural events that are open to the public in New York State.  TAP Plus is interested in applications from all regions in New York state.

The grant guidelines and application information  are available at http://www.tdf.org/Images/tap_plus_application08-09. Fiscally sponsored projects are eligible to apply through Fractured Atlas.

Examples of projects funded:

• A theatre seeking captioning for a performance
• A literature organization offering captioning for a reading
• An outdoor festival utilizing captioning for an arts demonstration
• A television station providing captioning for public broadcasting

October is Funding for Arts Month at the Foundation Center! Throughout the month, take advantage of the special events, classes, and Web resources available to help artists and nonprofit arts organizations become better grantseekers; network with fellow artists and colleagues; and gain insights into what’s happening in your local arts funding community. For more information or to register for programs, visit the October calendar for the Foundation Center library nearest you — Atlanta, Cleveland, New York City, San Francisco, or Washington, D.C.

I’ve been following a bill in the NY State legislature which would mandate that the state arts council start making modest grants to individual artists for the purpose of procuring live-work space. The bill recently passed in both the Assembly and the Senate, which means it’ll soon be headed to the Governer’s desk for signing.

I’m jazzed about this bill for a couple of reasons. First, it’s artist-centric rather than institution-centric, which is refreshing and hopefully a sign of things to come. Second, it’s about investing in the community infrastructure, rather than purchasing “art services” for state residents.

My only concern is that there’s been no new budget appropriation yet, which means there’s a possibility (presumably slim) that funding this new program will have to come out of NYSCA’s existing budget. On balance, that’s a risk I’m willing to take.

This piece originally appeared in the Fractured Atlas newsletter on January 15, 2006.

When one talks to arts industry insiders about their advocacy priorities, high on most lists is more dollars from Uncle Sam. Although the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and other sources of federal funding account for only a tiny portion of overall charitable support for the arts, funding at the federal level is seen as a reflection of national priorities. More money, after all, supposedly indicates that we’re a more respected and valued part of American society. When the NEA’s funding is cut or its programs pared back, we bemoan the loss since it allegedly represents an emergence of America’s latent disdain for our work.

The most notorious example of this latter phenomenon may be the “NEA 4″ incident of 1990, when awards to performance artists Karen Finley, Tim Miller, John Fleck, and Holly Hughes were vetoed on the basis that their sexually and politically provocative work was “lewd” and inappropriate for funding by taxpayer dollars. More significant, though, was the 1996 showdown when Congress slashed the endowment’s budget by 39% and imposed broad new restrictions on the types of funding permitted.

Underlying both of these battles were increasingly divergent ideas about art itself and the role it has to play in American society. At the risk of gross oversimplification, this debate can be largely broken down along the now cliché red-state/blue-state lines. Blue-staters tend to believe that artists who make social or political statements are fulfilling a responsibility to be relevant to their audience. They are therefore comfortable with art that pushes envelopes as well as buttons. Red-staters, meanwhile, believe that the primary responsibility of an artist is to entertain in a way that upholds and respects tradition. Yam-wielding performance artists, from this perspective, are neither entertaining nor particularly relevant, but simply and sometimes downright offensive.

We’re left with the question of how to reconcile a respect for such fundamental differences with the very notion of a federal agency that disburses funding for the arts on a national basis. Even if we were to miraculously agree as a society that our tax dollars should go to support the creation of “important” works of art, individual tastes be damned, we’d still be left with the problem of Washington politicians having ultimate control over those funding decisions.

A saner strategy is to allow direct public funding to filter down to the most local level that is economically feasible. Local funding agencies are better equipped to judge which works are important and relevant to their local communities. Furthermore, their funding decisions are relatively insulated from criticism by outsiders with conflicting artistic sensibilities.

That said, there remains a vital role for the federal government in indirect funding for the arts. Federal money is most effective when it focuses on “big picture” issues like arts education in public schools and a tax code that provides incentives for private philanthropy. Likewise, federal grantmakers like the NEA stand to make the biggest impact in the long run by supporting projects that contribute to a robust and sustainable infrastructure. This includes (surprise!) service organizations and other industry facilitators, as well as re-granting programs that can be carried out at the state and local level.

Art is as subjective as it gets, which is a big part of what makes it interesting in the first place. Inasmuch as I don’t want Jesse Helms deciding what I can or can’t see in an East Village blackbox, it’s equally unfair to impose my urban liberal sensibilities on his rural conservative constituents. After all, what would it say about the vitality and diversity of our nation if everyone agreed to like and support the same art?