Cultural Equity Grants Program Director Report
Cultural Equity Grants Program Director, Ms. Gomez announced the publication of CEG’s new funding guidelines and application booklet. Ms Gomez passed out copies, reminding commissioners of previous discussions about the changes to the guidelines, such as the addition of multi-year funding for Organization Project Grants. She said another significant change was in the maximum request amount for Cultural Equity Initiatives – Level 2, which was reduced to $100,000 from $120,000 to account for budget cutbacks and assure that three grants can still be awarded. She also indicated that there will be staff discussion and public meetings before next year's guidelines are published, to address ways to prevent applicants from receiving multiple grants from City funds for the same project. In response to a question from Commissioner Gatti, Ms. Louie said the program expected to print over 500 copies of the booklet and that it was also available on line.
Motion to review and approve the following to the Cultural Equity Grants panel pool:
Beverly Greene, Small Press Distribution
Kathy Barr, SF Book Center for the Book
Sean Lim, Asian American Theatre Co.
Tamara Foster, Brava!
Virginia Reed, Theater Director
Olivia Malabuyo, Bindlestiff Studio
Toby Leavitt, SF Shakespeare Festival
Commissioner Gatti opened the floor to public comment:
As an applicant in the last round of Organization Project Grants, Anthony Imperial, Director of NextArts, expressed concern about Cultural Equity Grants panel process. He was concerned about the possible conflict of interest for panelists who are recipients of CEG grants and about the fact that several of the panelists on the recent OPG panel were not familiar with NextArts. He believed that these factors worked against them in the review.
Ms. Jewelle Gomez expressed confidence in the panel process. She explained that panelists are screened for conflicts of interest before each panel review begins and that panelists cannot serve on a panel which reviews a category for which their organization is an applicant. She noted that the current panel pool includes approximately 300 artists and arts professionals from every genre, and ethnicity both inside the city and out, and that at each meeting of the Executive Committee, 3 – 10 new panelists are approved.
Director of Cultural Affairs, Richard Newirth added that first hand experience with arts in this city is not a prerequisite for serving on a panel, as panelists often come from outside of the city. It is expected that applicants must make their case through their proposal not on the panelists familiarity with them.
Commissioner Gatti stated that previous grantees are frequently surprised when they are not recommended for funding, which indicates that the panelists make judgement of the application based on the written proposal, not on a panelist’s familiarity with the group.
Ms. Gomez added that one of the places she finds panelists are in the application workshops. She explained that they had to have certain qualifications in the field and their knowledge of the arts is considered as well as nonprofit arts management/administrative capabilities. She pointed out that CEG had recently increased the potential Organization Project Grant panel pool by splitting the review process into separate panels for small and mid-sized organizations.
Mr. Newirth added that panels are intended to be large enough so that a single panelist cannot have an undue influence on the overall score.
Motion: Guggenheim/Cochran
Motion to approve recommendations for 46 grants in the 2003 cycle of Organization Project category totaling $555,492
Ms. Gomez reported that the OPG award recommendations are graduated with some being recommended at 100% of request amount and others at 75% of request amount, based on the final ranking.
Mr. Newirth pointed out that a significant number of organizations that usually receive funding weren’t recommended in this round.
Ms. Gomez commented that the panelists repeatedly said that this was a highly competitive pool of applicants. Ms. Louie added that while scores for mid-sized organizations were higher, they also had a higher cut off point so the disparity among the different sized organizations was accounted for.
Commissioner Gatti expressed appreciation that the arts commission was able to fund 40% of requests, which is quite high. Ms. Gomez agreed.
Commissioner Gatti opened the floor to public comment:
Mr. Imperial reiterated his disappointment that NextArts was not recommended for funding, stating concerns about the fairness of the panel’s decisions. He was concerned that the panel process does not allow applicants to respond to questions raised during a panel meeting, and that the process is biased against his organization because the panelists were not familiar with Mr. Imperial or NextArts.
Mr. Newirth responded by saying that the panel process is considered one of the fairest ways to review grants. Mr. Imperial reiterated that he didn’t feel that NextArts got a fair chance and that there is an inequity in the process. Commissioner Guggenheim asked what he felt the inequity was. Mr. Imperial responded by explaining that NextArts assists people who are underrepresented and that they really needed and deserved this funding. Commissioner Gatti stated that it is important in a panel review process to have a well-prepared proposal. He suggested that Mr. Imperial review his applications more carefully to make a stronger proposal. Commissioner Guggenheim asked if Mr. Imperial had ever attended an application workshop. Mr. Imperial said he had not. He also stated that the panelist asked questions about information that was in the proposal. As a result, he felt that the concerns about a lack of information were the fault of the panel. Commissioner Gatti stressed the importance of understanding Cultural Equity Grants review process and preparing adequately for it by attending workshops, asking for feedback from CEG staff and reviewing successful proposals.
Motion: Guggenheim/Cochran
