Community_Arts_and_Education_Committee
2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 COMMUNITY ARTS, EDUCATION, and GRANTS COMMITTEE
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
4:30 p.m.
25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 70
San Francisco
Minutes
The meeting was called to order at 4:37 p.m.
Commissioners Present: José Cuellar, Sherene Melania, Sherri Young
Staff Present: Nancy Gonchar, Judy Nemzoff, San San Wong, Ebony McKinney, Lucy Lin, Weston Teruya
- Cultural Equity Grant Program Director Report
Cultural Equity Grants Program Director San San Wong presented the first motion on the new three-year grant initiative, Arts & Communities: Innovative Partnerships (“ACIP”). Presentation support materials were distributed, including summary charts of grantee characteristics and neighborhoods and communities impacted by the recommended grants.
Ms. Wong described the key elements and goals of the grant initiative, and that two types of grants are available. Exploration grants are planning grants, providing artists/arts organizations and the target communities with opportunities to explore ideas and begin a dialogue with partners around potential projects. Realization grants are for implementation of these arts and non-arts sector projects. This grant does not require matching funds. Some applications not recommended for funding may better fit the purpose and program structure of the Organization Project Grants category, which focuses more on the artistic project and presentation; staff will suggest to those applicants that they apply to Organization Project Grants.
Ms. Wong reviewed supporting materials. The first document displayed pie charts showing the number of funding recommendations against the total number of applicants: 59% of Exploration and 47% of Realization applicants were recommended for funding. The second document displayed the total amount of funding recommended against the total of all project budgets, an indicant of how much activity the initiative is supporting. The third document showed the distribution of applicants and of projects in each supervisorial district, and the geographic neighborhoods and communities of interest impacted by the projects. The recommended projects would be taking place all over the city except in District 1. The districts with the highest number of project activity are Districts 6, 8, 9, and 10.The fourth and fifth documents showed the breakdown of applicants by discipline, applicants by budget size, and individual artists. The last document provided a quick view of the original data from which the above summary graphs were developed.
Commissioner Melania asked how many of the applicants recommended for funding are current and past Cultural Equity Grant recipients. Ms. Wong responded that that specific analysis was not done, but estimated that 25% were new to Cultural Equity Grants. Some applicants had received grants from Community Arts and Education. CEG anticipates new applicants as immigrant service organizations with established arts programming are eligible, and there is increased outreach and technical assistance.
Commissioner Cuellar asked about fund distribution between Exploration and Realization grants. Ms. Wong replied that fund allocation was based on field need as determined by how many proposals were submitted in each category. Then, approximate proportionate allocations were calculated as a guide. For example, if 75% of the requests were for Exploration, the initial fund allocation would be to fund approximately 75% of the applications. However, this allocation is tempered by the principle that only applications of quality which met the review criteria and had a high probability of success would be recommended for funding.
Commissioner Young made the following motion:
Motion to approve recommendations to award thirty-one grants totaling $626,121 in the 2007-2008 cycle of Arts & Communities: Innovative Partnerships grants to the following organizations and individual artists:
Exploration:
3rd I South Asian Independent Film Festival $10,000
Arab Cultural Center $10,000
Asian Improv aRts $10,000
Asian Women's Shelter $10,000
Chinatown Community Development Center $10,000
Croatian American Cultural Center $10,000
Door Dog Music Productions $10,000
Fernando Marti $10,000
Flyaway Productions $10,000
Jacinta Vlach $10,000
Purple Moon Dance Project $10,000
Radar Productions $10,000
Rebecca Schultz $10000
Red Poppy Art House $10,000
San Francisco Print Collective (SFPC) $10,000
StageWrite $9,940
ZACCHO Dance Theatre $10,000
Realization:
Bindlestiff Studio$31,500
Brava Theater Center/Brava! For Women in the Arts $35,000
Cultural Odyssey/The Medea Project $35,000
Dance Brigade $31,500
Galeria de la Raza $31,500
Intersection for the Arts $35,000
Joan Osato $31,500
Kate Connell $31,500
La Raza Centro Legal $32,681
Poor Magazine $31,500
Queer Cultural Center - QCC $31,500
Queer Women of Color Media Arts Project $35,000
Theo Rigby $31,500
Wendy Testu $31,500
Commissioner Cuellar asked for public comment.
Mr. Michael Reider stated that NextArts was a great help to him and that he received training through the organization. He said NextArts helped him get back on his feet and that it would be a shame to lose a project that helps people and communities to exhibit the talent out there. He stated that although it is a hard time that put people in an environment of violence, neither the organization or Mr. Imperial were tolerant of this and they were aware of public perception. He explained that Mr. Imperial “shaped up” people “on the edge” and those people would come back to work with him.
Mr. Anthony Imperial of NextArts distributed copies of photographs of individuals who had been through his work program, and an analysis of the districts of the applicants recommended for funding. He stated that he believed that the review panel analysis was based on personal feelings about him, and that if it were not for this, he would not be bringing this to the Commissioners. He stated that there were no gaps in his proposal to present District 10 with an opportunity to have their own Stern Grove and with this initiative to create jobs. District 10 is the most underserved in San Francisco. He said that funding their application would allow NextArts to secure the artistic talent. Mr. Imperial said that people depend on the promises of this administration, and asked “with no support from the San Francisco Arts Commission, what is it that the administration wants District 10 to realize?” Mr. Imperial provided a list of people who have worked for NextArts, whom he stated included many who started with Glide and are from District 10.
Mr. William Gandy said that he is a direct recipient of NextArts' work, and that work is hard to do without funding. He said that there was a problem with people on the grass who wanted to sit in seats, that Mr. Imperial was able to talk to them, then they thought the event was wonderful. After having worked at NextArts, and noting the situation of not getting funding, he said that he heard lots of great stuff and thought the project was really great; it was as if talking about two different grant proposals; he said they didn't seem to match up. He urged the Committee for a more investigative type of inquiry, specifically “to spend time on what the effect is, of what a person can tell you about, to affect the heart and soul.”
Mr. Gabe Woodard said it was a pleasure working with NextArts, and asked for the same thing about not cutting funding. He said that he is young, 28 years old.
Ms. Pamela Wu thought this list of applicants was great and representative. She wondered if there were plans for how applicants were going to say they are successful. She asked, if this round of grants is successful, will there be funding for another round?
Commissioner Cuellar asked Ms. Wong to review the panelist selection and ranking processes.
Ms. Wong said that panelists included individuals from social services and the arts who had practical experience with partnerships, and who had a level of cultural competence and knowledge of the San Francisco Bay Area. These individuals had the experience and expertise to review the criteria for evaluation, and represented a diversity of age (20-60 years old), race and culture.
Ms. Wong detailed the review process as follows. The applications are sent out in advance. She estimates that a panelist will spend about 1.5 - 2 hours on each of the ACIP applications. Primary and secondary readers are identified who begin each of the application reviews, then other panelists join the evaluations.
The scoring system for the individual application review is the criteria for evaluation listed in the published guidelines. The average of the scores is taken and then the rank order is determined of how well an applicant meets the criteria for evaluation. CEG staff frequently remind panelists to be consistent in their own scoring to ensure that each application is reviewed consistently. Once the ranking is created, panelists are not allowed to change scores or the ranking. Staff looks at where gaps between scores exist because that reflects a gap in meeting the evaluation criteria. Staff tries to set the floor for quality and will not fund those applications that do not meet the criteria well. Then, the panel and staff start at the top ranking, which represents the highest scores and quality, to look at allocation of funds. They also discuss the lowest level of funding possible without jeopardizing the success of the project.
Commissioner Melania asked about the reporting criteria for the Exploration Grants, for two groups coming together, and what was expected of the planning process. Ms. Wong responded that as part of City grants, a public activity or engagement is required, and the Commission expects to see project work plans and developed partnerships. With Exploration Grants, there are also applicants that have identified partners, but might not know which sub-community they want to address, or may not have mechanisms yet in place.
At this point, the reporting requirement forms have not yet been prepared. Ms. Wong explained that staff is in the process of developing three other components. One is the knowledge-sharing component. Second, there are two parts of the evaluation: one is for the individual projects, the second is for the overall initiative; staff is developing the methodology. The third component is documentation, which will include developing a corps of writers, who will be a combination of artists, journalists, and ethnographers. These are the three reflective components of this initiative.
The motion passed unanimously.
The second motion was amended to remove Victoria Evans-Erville, Artistic Director, African American Shakespeare Company because of the conflict of interest with Commissioner Young.
Commissioner Melania asked if it were typical to have different people from the same organization serving on an application review panel. Ms. Wong replied that there may be more than one individual from an organization but that they serve different functions, and they would not serve on the same panel.
Commissioner Melania made the following motion:
Motion to approve the following individuals as application review panelists for the Cultural Equity Grants Program:
Kegan Marling, Dancers' Group, Program Director
Gonzalina Morales, Senior Program Officer, SF Department of Children, Youth and Families
Joan Osato, Managing Director, Youth Speaks, Independent Theater Director
Karen Ransom, Assistant Director, Office of Undergraduate Admission, Stanford University
Michael Santoro, Executive Director, Door Dog Music Productions
Allison Sparks, MSW, Program Officer, United Way of the Bay Area, Health and Youth Worker
Dianthe “Dee” Spenser, Jazz Musician and Professor at San Francisco State University
Guillermo Galindo, Composer
Mahea Uchiyama, Founder/Artistic Director, Center for International Dance
Terri Winston, Executive Director, Women's Audio Mission, Audio Professor, City College of San Francisco
Kristina Wong, Independent Theater Artist
Ms. Wong also provided an update on the other grant categories and other activities. A total of 32 applications were received for Individual Artist Commissions. The grant review panels for Cultural Equity Initiatives - Level One is scheduled for the week of December 10, 2007. The outreach and application workshops for Organization Project Grants are currently taking place. She is also working on the California Cultural Data Project, a centralized database which will provide essentially a “joint grant application form” and will be an incredible tool for cultural policy development, aggregating a lot of data about organizations. Staff is going through an internal assessment process to ensure a fit with Arts Commission systems. Finally, CEG staff will also be conducting the panel for the Request for Proposals for an international arts festival. Those funds are from the Board of Supervisors, and the proposals will be vetted through the Arts Commission's public process.
- Community Arts and Education Program Director Report
Ms. Nemzoff distributed biographies for the 2007-2008 WritersCorps teachers. Commissioners will meet teachers at the December full Commission meeting.
The Arts Education Program will present new initiatives in January.
Ms. Nemzoff led a discussion about Cultural Center reporting. She said new initiatives like the California Cultural Data Project (“CCDP”) should influence future reporting. All CEG and CAE grant recipients, including the Cultural Centers, will participate with CCDP by 2009. Also, the Department of Children, Youth, and Families is leading a city-wide interagency conversation about centralizing reporting for community-based organizations, which the Cultural Centers might be eligible to participate in. The goal would be to help identify underperforming community-based organizations, support efforts to either defund or stabilize these organizations, and identify underserved communities or programs. This process will also identify community-based organizations receiving funding from multiple City agencies and eliminate multiple report and financial forms currently required by each funding entity.
Ms. Nemzoff asked for feedback from Commissioners regarding the current reporting and how the Commission can intervene or respond when we know Cultural Centers are in trouble.
Commissioner Young stated that learning about the Centers once there are already “red flags” is too late. Commissioners need to be more engaged and involved with the Centers and very familiar with their activities. She encouraged Centers to invite Commissioners to events. She suggested that Commissioners visit the Centers unannounced. She asked if this should be a requirement of CAEG Commissioners.
Commissioner Melania said Commissioners receive final reports well into the following fiscal year and they are often incomplete. She suggested that site visits might prevent Commissioners from responding in crisis mode.
Commissioner Cuellar said that, based on the reporting, some Centers did not serve very many people despite receiving a large amount of funding. He noted that every report had glaring errors, including financial calculations, and asked how this could be addressed.
Ms. Nemzoff stated that because of the current report cycle, Commissioners receive final reports well into the next fiscal year.
Commission Young re-stated that Commissioners and staff should make site visits.
Ms. Wong said that CEG is commissioning a series of ecology scans especially in the immigrant communities to address the changing demographics of San Francisco. She asked whether the Commission would find this information useful.
Commissioner Melania said that some Centers take their funding for granted and added that the Commission should establish accountability and ensure that the organizations serve their target communities. She asked if the committee meetings should be held at the different Centers. Ms. Nemzoff said meetings had been held quarterly at the Cultural Centers, but a consistent lack of quorum ended this practice.
Commissioner Cuellar said that an honest and authentic dialogue needs to take place between the Commission and the board and staff at the Cultural Centers. Commissioner Melania asked if a Commissioner should be on each board. She said this would facilitate communication and information flow.
Commissioner Cuellar opened the floor to public comment.
Pam Peniston from the Queer Cultural Center (“QCC”) did not necessarily wish to see a Commissioner on each Center's board, though she welcomed Commissioners to the events.
Ms. Wong said evaluation of the Centers should include a panel of peers.
Commissioner Melania said the committee meetings should be held at the Cultural Centers each quarter and should include a site visit interview.
Ms. Nemzoff said the due dates for the final report can be altered so that they can be reviewed before funds are allocated for the following fiscal year.
Ms. Wu said that the Commission should be aware when planning the new deadline for reporting that the Asian Pacific Islander Cultural Center and QCC produce festivals towards the end of the fiscal year. Ms. Peniston agreed.
- Adjournment
As there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
12/31/07 RT
