Leading with a Racial Equity Lens in the Cultural Arts — original pdf

Backup

Cultural Arts Funding  Review Process Arts Commission and AIPP Panel Workshop 1/13/2020 Leading with a Racial Equity Lens in the Cultural Arts Equity Framework • • • • • City goal of achieving a point at which race is no longer a  predictor of quality of life outcomes; (acknowledges  intersectionality but race is most reliable predictor) Equity Office helps normalize, organize, and operational  race‐forward efforts across city departments Strategic Direction 2023 – “Equity” not a separate effort,  but infused throughout Ensure that we are not further “othering,” marginalizing,  or displacing through good intentions Commit together to continue this work throughout all of  CAD’s programs to broaden and deepen community  access to City investment in the arts and remove barriers  to participation • MJR Partners and Equity Office identifying areas where  we can focus need for change across CAD’s work – from  internal to external policies and practices Cultural Funding Process Refresher The Cultural Funding Review Process will consist of the following key phases: Listen Refine Recommend Feedback Draft Goal:  Hold listening sessions to hear the views and values of the community through conversations with individuals and small and large groups. Events: Town Hall Kick Off Event | July 10 One-on-Ones | July 11 - 12 Listening Sessions | July 13 - Aug. 27 Virtual Comment Box Goal:  Conclude Listening Sessions  Start Feedback Analysis-continue conversations with the community  Begin to analyze feedback from those conversations to organize into more specific themes and directions to discuss further. Phase 1& 2 participation: 175 Town Hall Event Participants • • • 540 participants in 39 unique stakeholder listening sessions including o Interdepartmental City Staff o Community stakeholders representing arts education, faith- based, social services, funders & community advocacy/organizing o City of Austin Cultural Contractors & members of the creative community 1160 Unduplicated Hours of stakeholder engagement • Additional meetings with stakeholder groups such as the Equity Action Team, Raza Roundtable, Austin Arts Advocacy Coalition, and council members & policy staff Listening Session Goals: • Gather multiple points of view regarding programs and operations of the CAD • Understand perceptions and expectations of CAD, of the funding and grant making process from announcement of grant opportunities thru the review and contracting process; • Understand grantees’ (artists/organizations across the spectrum of grantees) sense of shared responsibility for contributing to a healthy cultural system in the Austin; Identify effectiveness and potential efficiencies in the grant making processes; Stimulate awareness of the City’s goals for achieving racial equity; and • Understand grantees’ (contractors’) approach to inclusion across five key • • programmatic and operational areas: o Programming o Audience expansion o Marketing and public information o Staffing o Governance What we have heard Disconnected & diverging views: o The source of funding for arts grants/contracts (HOT tax); o The increasing revenue in HOT tax receipts; o increased demands on grant funding dollars; o direct and indirect implications of that increasing demand; o stewardship and public service; o the City’s commitment to equity in the distribution of arts dollars; o the idea of a cultural system - a cultural community that believes in and invests in itself through collaborative cross purpose interaction Vision & Leadership: The need for direction setting in the arts sector o How do the programs and services of CAD provide leadership for community building? (within the arts and cultural sector) o Who is responsible for “nurturing the rise of the individual artists and artists of color? o What is more important to CAD/the City - public participation or tourism? o How is CAD addressing the idea of cultural sustainability? o Is there a pre-determined plan for redistribution of resources that could have an adverse effect on major/long standing institutions? o Is the CAD/City concerned about the protection of neighborhoods and cultural traditions? Effectiveness in the Grantmaking process o Further clarity needed on the HOT Tax legislation and the uses of those funds; “legality” of funding neighborhood-based programs, arts education programs in and out of school; and use of funds to provide organizational capacity building, o Explore Potential for coordination with other city departments associated with grant- making and approval process, (i.e., EDD, Finance, Legal, Purchasing. Accounts Payable, Risk Management (Insurance), ADA, Vendor registration, Parks and Rec, Equity Office and City Council) to look for efficiencies in the contracting and funding process, o Strengthening the panel review process – is it really “peer review”? This area of the grant review process brought to the surface a variety of challenges. Participants suggested conversation and review of this aspect no the process is critical. o Is the ratio of applicants to the number of awards granted sustainable? The high number of awards signals a sense of “entitlement” rather than an annual review of the request and the merit/contribution of the project to the City. o Rationale for the evaluation (final report) process. How does CAD use the information requested in the evaluation (final report) process. “Does anyone actually read all that stuff?” Role of the Arts Commission o Participants raised questions about the role of the Commission, their input on policy/vision setting for the agency. The meaning of “diversity” and “equity”: o Conversations ranged from outrage at idea of the City asking “struggling” organizations to consider diversity and equity in their programming; others asked for a specific definition of terms. o Representatives of culturally specific organizations and artists of color discussed diversity as a moral and civic imperative, and “in the City of Austin equity is an an unmet promise” (the term, “culturally specific organizations” refers to organizations founded by, explicitly serving, or celebrating the artistry of African, Latinx, Asian, Arab, and Native Americans) o There was significant push back to a focus on racial diversity. Despite generally positive views of diversity, many prefer to look at diversity in the full range of “difference” as described above. This only makes the sought after change (of culturally specific organizations and artists of color) more difficult. How CAD has responded in real time: • Moved up pre-contract & final report submission due dates for cultural contractors - incentivized early completion • ADA quiz no longer required every year • Drafting reducing # of questions in final report questionnaire • Working closely with Purchasing & Finance offices to improve contract management • Collaboration with Equity Office, Convention Center in best practices in grant making Emphasizing resident centered/friendly language & communications in collaboration with CTM Office of Design & Delivery Referring cultural contractors to EDD Small Business Program when applicable • Networking with other local arts agencies, Grantmakers in the Arts conference efficiency & contracting • • Extending the Process Why we are extending the process The depth and breadth of the community feedback collected indicates need for wide ranging and complex change in CAD cultural funding from operational to programmatic levels. Refining, drafting, and implementing recommendations - all the while communicating efficiently with the community – with limited staff capacity- requires more time in the process. Communicating an additional “interim year” to the community • Hold steady all core funding & cultural heritage festivals, per current panel scores (as always pending actual/total HOT tax allocation funds) • Explore options to increase funding for FY 20 community initiatives (5TH year cultural contractors in this category will be allowed to apply for sixth year of funding) • Using community feedback from Cultural funding review process to enhance capacity building based funding/programming to better support current & potential cultural contractors Extending the process an additional “interim year” and TEMPO TEMPO is on hiatus for FY2020. The TEMPO Working Group is launching. The TEMPO program has been hugely successful in creating points of community pride, curiosity and conversation, in each district in the City. It has also created success for individual artists and artist teams, bringing them more opportunities for commissions and career growth. Ideally TEMPO will be funded in FY 2021. DRAFT TIMELINE: January 2020 (REFINE) Engage Equity office, CPIO Community Engagement Team and ODD to support the extended timeline • 13 – Special called Arts commission meeting with Margie • 25 – Community Workshop #1 for program Mission/Vision and Definition of Diversity and Inclusion • 27 – Regular Arts Commission Meeting – agenda item to discuss definition of Diversity and Inclusion and/or • program mission/vision February 2020 (REFINE) • 24 – Regular Arts Commission Meeting – agenda item to continue to refine program mission and vision • 29 – Community Workshop #2 for program Mission/Vision and Definition of Diversity and Inclusion March 2020 • 16 – Regular Arts Commission Meeting – agenda item to adopt program mission and vision, and definitions of diversity • 17-30 – Release adopted mission/vision and definitions of diversity and inclusion to the public April – July 2020 (DRAFT) • Program and Guidelines changes developed by staff based on community feedback. • Community workshop feedback sessions (3&4) held in early June and July to further refine and revise the program and and inclusion guidelines August – October 2020 (DRAFT) • Staff finalizes program changes and new guidelines. • Seek additional community feedback as needed November – December 2020 (RECOMMEND • New guidelines are vetted by Arts Commission and City Council January – February – 2021 (RECOMMEND) • New Programs and Guidelines approved by Arts Commission • New application released to the public by March 1, 2021 DRAFT TIMELINE REFINE ---------------------------------- DRAFT ---------------------------- RECOMMEND -------------- 2020 January  •13th: Special  AC meeting  with Margie  Reese •25th:  Community  Workshop #1:  Mission/Vision  •27th: Regular  AC meeting to  discuss  Mission/Vision  February •24th: Regular  AC meeting to  refine program  Mission &  Vision •29th:  Community  Workshop #2  for program  Mission/Vision  March •16th: Regular  AC meeting to  adopt program  Mission/Vision •17th‐30th:  Release  adopted  Mission/Vision  to the public April to July •Based on  community  feedback, staff  develop  program and  guidelines  changes •Community  Workshops (in  June and July)  to refine and  revise program  guidelines August to  October • Staff finalize  program  changes and  new  guidelines • Plan/organiz e additional  community  feedback  opportunitie s as needed November &  December • New  guidelines  vetted by  Arts  Commission  and City  Council,  Audit and  Finance  presentation 2021 January  & February • New  programs  and  guidelines  approved by  AC • New  application  released to  the public by  March 1,  2021 Process Roles Consultants: MJR Partners Provide for year long (+) cultural funding review process including design and delivery of evaluation, public engagement activities and recommendation processes. • Key Milestones • Community Engagement Opportunities • Outcomes • Recommendations for programs changes • Conduct Overall comprehensive evaluation of CAD cultural funding model • SWOT Analysis of current funding program policies, operations, practices • Provide relevant best practices from a national perspective • Submit Draft report to staff for review • Prepare and present final report with recommendations for program improvements • Participate in public & individual stakeholders meetings with community & city leadership • Present on topic cultural equity to key stakeholders Project Manager: Alberto Mejia A project manager is the person responsible for leading a project from its inception to execution. This includes planning, execution and managing the people, resources and scope of the project Activity and resource planning • • Organizing and motivating a project team • Controlling time management: Sequence activity, Estimate the duration of activity, Develop a schedule Maintain a schedule Cost estimating and developing the budget Ensuring customer satisfaction Analyzing and managing project risk • • • • Monitoring progress • Managing reports and necessary documentation Project Sponsor: Meghan Wells The project sponsor is an individual (often a manager or executive) with overall accountability for the project. He or she is primarily concerned with ensuring that the project delivers the agreed upon business benefits and acts as the representative of the organization, playing a vital leadership role through a series of areas: • • • • • Provides organizational context, expertise, and guidance to the project manager and the team; Champions the project, including “selling” and marketing it throughout the organization to ensure capacity, funding, and priority for the project; Acts as an escalation point for decisions and issues that are beyond the authority of the project manager; Acts as an additional line of communication and observation with team members, customers, and other stakeholders; and Acts as the link between the project, the business community, and strategic level decision-making groups. Key Partners & Co-Designers 1) Office of Equity: • Applying overall Racial Equity Lens • Operationalizing equity (lead with Race, explicitly including LGBTQI & disability community 2) Public Engagement Office • Designing community engagement process: why > who> what> when> where >what next • Facilitation design of engagements and actual facilitation 3) Office of Design & Development • Service design: planning and organizing people, infrastructure, communication, and material components of a service in order to improve its quality and the interaction between the service provider and its customers. Implementation of program changes through lens of service design • Key Partners & Co-Designers Arts Commission: Advise the City Council in all arts-related matters, including long range planning, allocations process, and coordination with the comprehensive plan; Promote close cooperation between the City and all private citizens, institutions, and agencies interested in or conducting activities relating to the arts in the city, so that all art resources within the city may be coordinated to maximize promotion and support of the arts in the city; Facilitate communication between arts organizations; and foster and assist the development of the arts in the city. Strategic Themes Organizational Characteristics (Internal change) o Advancing diversity, inclusion and racial equity is a priority for the Economic Development Department and the CAD division. This priority was explicitly echoed in community conversations, with individual artists, and organizations and community leaders representing communities of color. o Generally speaking, traditional and white led institutions struggle to accept that historic inequities in funding priorities exist in the city and are mirrored by racial bias in the larger civic realm. o CAD will need to take a strong, disruptive stance to address the sense of entitlement that exists among long-time contractors, which might include a move toward redistribution of arts funding. This consideration is not a process that can be accomplished in one funding cycle or without communication of specific goals related to accountability or clarity of intent. o Division operations are heavily focused on transactional procedures. This is primarily due to the overwhelming numbers of grant and service contract categories implemented by the CAD staff. A critical review of grant making/contracting system could reveal efficiencies and identify the CAD zone of flexibility. o CAD will need to re-consider initiatives created to address “access”. Well intended initiatives and new grant programs are actually creating more marginalization by “targeting” specific population groups. A key step in this area is an examination of the “Fiscal Sponsor” grant, to determine if this structure is promoting or impeding the growth of culturally specific organizations. City-wide priorities (civic change) Two central city-wide priorities top the list of public concern: o Space for production and presentation of arts programs. Elimination and increases costs of exhibition and performance spaces is a recurring theme in this phase of the assessment and noted as a priority with city-wide implications; Services to the field. Beyond its role as a source of funding support for and the cultural sector, the agency should consider broadening its capacity to focus more on building arts management skills and increasing technical assistance to the sector. Further investigation of these two priorities should focus on: Strategies to refresh the arts infrastructure from a systems approach, that considers developing/supporting in spaces inside of neighborhoods that can sustain and promote culturally specific expression, support individual arts and grow mid-sized organizations; • Protecting neighborhoods with distinct cultural and historic resources; Articulating of the city’s commitment to arts learning for children in both in-school and out of school environments; Emphasizing CADs vision and commitment to racial equity. An equity commitment statement should be developed in alignment with the City’s goals related to DEI and made highly visible to the public; Attending to knowledge building needs of Austin’s current and next generation of arts leaders. o • • • • Accountability (capacity change) CAD will need to improve its own efforts to fully represent and provide services its diverse community. In this regard, the CAD will need to: • Increase its stamina for developing and enforcing an accountability system (policies and practices) that measure and hold grantees and contractors responsible for expending public dollars in ways that align with SD23; • Intentionally work to strengthen culturally specific organizations to achieve institution status - i.e. growth of operating budget, access to permanent facilities; and increased access to private sector funding; • Provide an approach to help organizations develop self-assessment measures that achieve diversity goals in governance, programming, marketing, staff recruitment and retention, public engagement areas; • Center the grant review process on the actual information requested of and provided by contractors and grant-seekers in the application and reporting process; and • Recruit and retain racially diverse & bi-lingual staff, including African-American, Latino, and Asian and Asian American communities to consider a variety of cultural perspectives in the delivery of public services. Implications (values change) Consideration of the CAD staff and Commission as guardian of the public trust revolves around bold and clearly communicated value statements. Value statements inform the agency’s work and provide guiding principles for decision making. Guiding Principles can also offer a set of nonnegotiable standards for preventing and addressing bias in the distribution of public funding for the arts. Without stated principles, the agency implies that equity is an unachievable goal. Example Value Statements (for discussion only ) • CAD believes that freedom of cultural expression is fundamental to civic life • Public support of arts and humanities preserves and promotes the history and heritage of the city • Commitment to equitable policies and practices are embedded in our organizational structure and are central to serving the broader Austin community • Public/private sector collaboration is key to leveraging resources, experience and knowledge to expand access to the arts for the entire community. Interactive Activity DRAFT TIMELINE REFINE ---------------------------------- DRAFT ---------------------------- RECOMMEND -------------- 2020 January  •13th: Special  AC meeting  with Margie  Reese •25th:  Community  Workshop #1:  Mission/Vision  •27th: Regular  AC meeting to  discuss  Mission/Vision  February •24th: Regular  AC meeting to  refine program  Mission &  Vision •29th:  Community  Workshop #2  for program  Mission/Vision  March •16th: Regular  AC meeting to  adopt program  Mission/Vision •17th‐30th:  Release  adopted  Mission/Vision  to the public April to July •Based on  community  feedback, staff  develop  program and  guidelines  changes •Community  Workshops (in  June and July)  to refine and  revise program  guidelines August to  October • Staff finalize  program  changes and  new  guidelines • Plan/organiz e additional  community  feedback  opportunitie s as needed November &  December • New  guidelines  vetted by  Arts  Commission  and City  Council,  Audit and  Finance  presentation 2021 January  & February • New  programs  and  guidelines  approved by  AC • New  application  released to  the public by  March 1,  2021 January 2020 (REFINE) Engage Equity office, CPIO Community Engagement Team and ODD to support the extended timeline • 13 – Special called Arts commission meeting with Margie • 25 – Community Workshop #1 for program Mission/Vision and Definition of Diversity and Inclusion • 27 – Regular Arts Commission Meeting – agenda item to discuss definition of Diversity and Inclusion and/or program mission/vision February 2020 (REFINE) • 24 – Regular Arts Commission Meeting – agenda item to continue to refine program mission and vision • 29 – Community Workshop #2 for program Mission/Vision and Definition of Diversity and Inclusion March 2020 • 16 – Regular Arts Commission Meeting – agenda item to adopt program mission and vision, and definitions of diversity and inclusion • 17-30 – Release adopted mission/vision and definitions of diversity and inclusion to the public Goal: Facilitate conversation with community around themes and directions to refine or reshape the Cultural Funding Program to begin forming draft recommendations for program changes. Goal: Draft recommendations for program changes, discussion with staff and Arts Commission Working Groups. Goal: Community Feedback and dialogue around draft recommendations for program changes, briefings with Council members, adoption by Arts Commission. • http://austintexas.gov/culturalequityatx • Subscribe to our newsletter • Follow us social! @cityofaustinarts • Visit us for office hours: 2nd and 4th Tuesdays, 9am to 1pm – no appointment necessary Connect Alberto Mejia (He/Him/His) Program Manager, Cultural Funding & Investments City of Austin Cultural Arts Division Economic Development Department 5202 East Ben White Boulevard, Suite 400 Austin, TX 78741 (512) 974-7875 alberto.mejia@austintexas.gov http://www.austincreates.com @econvitalityATX