Trend or Tipping Point:
Arts & Social Change Grantmaking

Photo courtesy of C+PAD=Detroit

A 2010 Report &Resource forFunders
October 2010

Lambent Foundation

Trend or Tipping Point:
Arts & Social Change Grantmaking
A 2010 Report and Resource for Funders

Written by
Pam Korza and Barbara Schaffer Bacon

Published by Animating Democracy, a program of Americans for the Arts
with support fromNathan Cummings Foundation, Open Society Foundations
CrossCurrents Foundation, and Lambent Foundation
October 2010

Copyright 2010 Americans for the Arts

AMERICANS FOR THE ARTSth

Celebrating its 50 anniversary in 2010, Americans for the Arts is the nation’s leading nonprofit organization foradvancing the arts in America. Americans for the Arts is dedicated to representing and serving local communities andcreating opportunities for every American to participate in and appreciate all forms of the arts. It works in five coreareas—research, policy, advocacy, professional development, and visibility—to accomplish three goals: 1) foster anenvironment in which the arts can thrive and contribute to the creation of more livable communities; 2) generate
more public- and private-sector resources for the arts and arts education; and 3) build individual appreciation of thevalue of the arts. From offices in Washington, DC, and New York City, it serves more than 150,000 organizational andindividual members and stakeholders.

ANIIMATING DEMOCRACY
Launched in 1999, Animating Democracy fosters civic engagement through arts and culture. Over the last decade,Animating Democracy has supported, through regranting, a wide range of arts organizations doing compelling civic
engagement work, implemented national research, and developed field resources and publications. Animating
Democracy is frequently called upon to serve as program adviser, researcher, and funding/research partner.
Today, as the ideals and the work of arts-based civic engagement have gained currency across many sectors,
Americans for the Arts and Animating Democracy have invested new energy in efforts to: 1) demonstrate the public
value of creative work that contributes to social change and 2) inform public and private-sector leaders about thiswork as part of a larger endeavor to influence the development of policy that advances the role of the arts in civic
engagement. Core initiatives include:
The Arts & Civic Engagement Impact Initiative works to advance understanding among practitioners, funders, andother stakeholders of the social impact of arts-based civic engagement and social change work. We are accomplishing
this through Field Lab learning about evaluation, a national Working Group, and commissioned writings and casestudies. IMPACT—a web-based resource and key component of the initiative—centralizes and brings arts-for-socialchange specificity to a body of extant and new evaluation resources and frameworks.
The Arts & Social Change Mapping Initiative maps and highlights the ways arts and culture are being activated toengage and make change. A centralized online resource makes this important work visible and serves to link the arts,
change agents, funders, and an interested public. Specifically, the initiative produces:
A robust, online registry of artists and cultural and community organizations that foster and support civic
engagement and social change through the arts;
A Working Guide to the Landscape of Art & Change, a collection of new and extant writings describing arts forchange work in particular segments of the arts and social justice fields;
Typology and vocabulary that helps to distinguish different streams of practice and to advance unifying
language for the field; andA current portrait of funding support for arts that foster civic engagement and social change in the form of
this report and related Funder Directory.
www.AmericansForTheArts.org/AnimatingDemocracyArts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

Table of Contents
Trend or Tipping Point
Arts & Social Change Grantmaking: A 2010 Report for Funders
Table of Figures.......................................................................................................................................................... iii
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Purpose...........................................................................................................................................................................1
Need/Impetus/Context ...................................................................................................................................................1
Report Contents..............................................................................................................................................................3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................ 4
METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................................ 10
Definitions ....................................................................................................................................................................10
Survey ...........................................................................................................................................................................11
Interviews .....................................................................................................................................................................13
Review of Relevant Funding Reports ............................................................................................................................13RESPONDENT PROFILE .............................................................................................................................................. 13
Who Responded to the Survey?....................................................................................................................................13
FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................................................. 16
Impressions of the Funding Landscape ........................................................................................................................16
What Types of Funders Are Supporting Arts for Change? ............................................................................................17
Independent Foundations / Public Sector Funders / Nonprofit Grantmakers / Local and State Arts Agencies .....17
National Foundations ..............................................................................................................................................19
Grantmaker Affinity Groups ....................................................................................................................................20
Individual Donors ....................................................................................................................................................22
Next Generation Philanthropists .............................................................................................................................23
What is the Scope of Funding for Arts for Change Work? ............................................................................................25
Explicitness of Support ............................................................................................................................................25
Frequency of Support ..............................................................................................................................................26
Amount of Support ..................................................................................................................................................27
What Drives Support of Arts for Change Work? ...........................................................................................................28
Who is Receiving Support? ...........................................................................................................................................34
What Types of Social or Civic Outcomes Are Most Important to Funders? ..................................................................35
In Which Issue Areas Are Arts and Cultural Strategies Being Supported? ....................................................................37
General Grantmaking, Program Funding, Intermediaries ............................................................................................42Types of Grant Support ................................................................................................................................................44
What Do Funding Programs Look Like? ...................................................................................................................46
What are the Barriers to Supporting Arts for Change? ................................................................................................48
Funders Who Are Not Supporting Arts for Change.......................................................................................................54[i]

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
Barriers Preventing Support of Arts for Change Work ............................................................................................55
Factors That Could Drive Support for Those Not Funding Arts for Change .............................................................56
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: TRENDS OR TIPPING POINTS ............................................................................................ 59
IMPLICATIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES ........................................................................................................................ 60
Four Strands of Interest in Arts for Change Support ....................................................................................................60
Strategies for Growing Support ....................................................................................................................................60
1. Enhance grantmaker knowledge and practice ....................................................................................................61
2. Establish cross-cutting collaborations .................................................................................................................64
3. Cultivate nascent grantmakers and individual donors ........................................................................................66
4. Increase the visibility of arts for change work and develop evidence of its impact ............................................67
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................................ 68
AUTHORS’ AFTERWORD: Building Field Capacity ...................................................................................................... 69
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................. 71
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................................................ 2
Appendix 1: List of Survey and Interview Participants .................................................................................................75
Appendix 2: Survey Instrument ....................................................................................................................................83
Appendix 3: Interview Protocol ....................................................................................................................................92
Appendix 4: Funding Report References.......................................................................................................................93

STATISTICAL REPORT
Offers additional charts and graphs that summarize responses to the survey of grantmakers. Available on
the Animating Democracy web site.
DIRECTORY OF FUNDERS
Identifies and profiles more than 150 private- and public-sector grantmakers that are supporting arts forchange work based on survey responses. Available on the Animating Democracy web site. Call Americans
for the Arts at 202.371.2830.

www.AmericansForTheArts.org/AnimatingDemocracy[ii]Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

Table of Figures
Figure 1 Respondents by Geographic Location ................................................................................. 14
Figure 2 Type of Funding Agency ...................................................................................................... 15
Figure 3 Currently or Plan to Fund by Funder Type .......................................................................... 18
Figure 4 How Available Funding is Described ................................................................................... 25
Figure 5 Frequency of Arts for Change Grantmaking........................................................................ 26
Figure 6 Estimated Total Funding for Arts for Change Work (Most Recent Fiscal Year) .................. 27
Figure 7 Reasons for Supporting Arts for Change Work ................................................................... 29
Figure 8 Eligible Funding Recipients .................................................................................................. 35
Figure 9 Importance of Civic and Social Outcomes in Overall Grantmaking (Private Sector) .......... 36
Figure 10 Importance of Civic and Social Outcomes in Overall Grantmaking (Public Sector) .......... 36
Figure 11 Issue Areas Funded (Private Sector).................................................................................. 39
Figure 12 Issue Areas Funded (Public Sector) ................................................................................... 40
Figure 13 How Arts for Change is Supported .................................................................................... 43
Figure 14 Categories of Program Funding in Support of Arts for Change ........................................ 47
Figure 15 Challenges to Supporting Arts for Change ........................................................................ 48
Figure 16 Grantee Assessment Requirements .................................................................................. 52
Figure 17 Challenges for Funders Not Supporting Arts for Change Work ........................................ 55
Figure 18 Factors That Would Drive Support for Arts for Change Work .......................................... 57[iii]

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

Trend or Tipping Point: Arts & Social Change Grantmaking
A 2010 Report & Resource for Funders

INTRODUCTION
PurposeTrend or Tipping Point: Arts & Social Change Grantmaking assembles a first-time portrait of arts
funders, social change funders, and others supporting civic engagement and social change througharts and cultural strategies. Focusing on grantmaking in the United States, the report aims tocharacterize the nature of support from both private and public sectors. It examines how various
grantmakers think about social change in the context of agency goals and what outcomes they arelooking for through their support. The report looks at the types of activities and projects that are
being funded as well as grantmaking strategies and structures. It documents obstacles andopportunities for greater support, considering both funders who are and are not supporting thiswork.
In total, the report seeks to illuminate arts for social change philanthropy and provides someconcrete information to advance both discussions about this field of work and support for it.

Need/Impetus/Context
I’ve come to see this constant re-visioning and re-defining as a driving force in the creative
process of democracy, a process that’s not maintained in a fixed and settled consensus,
but one that has been historically powered forward by argumentation, dissent, protest andbold imagination.
Sekou Sundiata, artist
Across sectors, artists and arts organizations are increasingly being called upon to activate thesocial imagination to bring forth new ways to know and understand an increasingly complex
world. Artists are providing a critical lens that educates, provokes, and holds a mirror to society,influencing what gets attention in the public sphere and shaping perspective and opinion. Arts andculture are engaging communities in creative process and social action, broadening who has voice
and offering a connecting point to those who have not felt power in the civic realm before. The
arts and culture are grounding grassroots organizing and lending inspirational images, messages,
and meaning to sustain the work of movement building. They are animating public process,Page | 1

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
spaces, and dialogue. In communities and in a national context, the arts are demonstrating theirpotency to address social goals of building healthy communities and a healthy democracy.
Several interests and environmental factors pointed to the value of researching the state offunding for arts and social change. A key impetus for this research was the Arts & Social Justice
Working Group, a small and committed coalition of funders and field leaders convened initially in2007 by Claudine Brown, then director of Arts & Culture at the Nathan Cummings Foundation, to
explore common interests and concerns. Observing the limited funding directed specifically forarts for change, Working Group participants believed that civic engagement, community
development, and social justice funders, as well as arts funders, have potential to expand anddeepen their support. They wanted a more accurate sense of who, beyond a familiar core of
grantmakers, is supporting this work as well as how funders are thinking about it. Arts & Social
Justice Working Group members identified learning more about arts and social justice funding
activity as a high priority first step.
Social justice philanthropy on the whole is growing according to Social Justice Grantmaking II: An
Update on U.S. Foundation Trends, the 2009 report issued by the Foundation Center.1 It is animperative being felt in the face of new issues emerging and persistent social issues worsened by
the economic downturn.
The current economic environment has also created a critical context for arts practitioners andfunders to consider the contributions of arts and culture in effecting social change. Those whowork on the ground have been motivated by even greater need and urgency in regard to thiswork. They have been buoyed by the Obama administration’s recognition of both arts andcommunity organizing, which has inspired many more Americans to look to public service andother ways they can effect positive change in their communities. At the October 2008
Grantmakers in the Arts conference, in the immediacy of economic turmoil, funding leaders
anticipated that many could be looking to fulfill multiple goals with more limited resources andthat investment in arts and culture as contributors to social and civic solutions would become
more desirable.
A sense of new possibilities for collaborations between the arts and other sectors in addressing
concerns has been evident in convenings and inquiries motivated by funders and policy makers.
Convening activities of the Arts & Democracy project, a project of State Voices, have sought tocross-pollinate ideas among arts groups, organizers, and policymakers. Art & Democracy was oneof the organizers of the May 2009 White House briefing on art, community, social justice, andnational recovery. Interested in the potential for greater collaboration between arts andorganizing spheres, Opportunity Agenda convened stakeholders in Telluride, CO in 2009 to explore
ideas and continued this dialogue in 2010. Americans for the Arts’ annual National Arts Policy
Roundtable, a partnership with the Sundance Preserve, took up the topic of Arts & Civic
Engagement in 2008 among policy, government, and philanthropy leaders as a strategy for change
in the 21st century. It is working in partnership with the Independent Sector to integrate artists
1

The Social Justice Grantmaking II report will be referenced as context throughout this report. This report updates
and builds upon Social Justice Grantmaking: A Report on Foundation Trends, issued in 2005.

Page | 2

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
and the topic of arts and civic engagement into the core content of its 2010 conference. And the
National Endowment for the Arts’ increased interest in cross-sector and cross-agency partnerships
has also inspired new possibilities for collaboration.
In 2009, Animating Democracy, a program of Americans for the Arts, launched the Arts & Social
Change Mapping Initiative to respond to these and related interests. With support from the
Nathan Cummings Foundation, Open Society Foundations, CrossCurrents Foundation, andLambent Foundation, the initiative set out to identify and profile existing sources of private- andpublic-sector funding for this work and, in so doing, to gain insight into the current state ofsupport for arts for change work. This report and the companion Funders Directory are the resultof a survey, interviews, and review of grantmakers’ reports.
The initiative also responds to other interests shared by practitioners and funders:
To synthesize a typology and a vocabulary that helps describe and distinguish the full
spectrum of creative strategies, different streams of practice, and intended civic and social
outcomes as well as advance unifying language for the field; andTo create a centralized resource of active artists, arts organizations, and excellent project
examples that can meet the needs of a wide variety of stakeholders and serve to connect
social and cultural activists.
All types of funders—arts, social community development, justice, private, public, agency, or
individual—are seeking to learn about and consider their place in supporting this kind of work.
This report, along with other Mapping Initiative resources, can inform internal conversations andprogram design as well as provide a resource for peer exchange, sharing of reports anddocumentation, collective understanding of the impact of field activity, and strategic collaboration
among funders.

Report Contents
In addition to this findings report, two additional resources are available on Animating
Democracy’s website (www.AmericansForTheArts.org/AnimatingDemocracy). A Statistical Reportprovides additional charts and graphs with data summaries based on the survey of grantmakers
conducted by Americans for the Arts. The Directory of Funders identifies and profiles more than
150 private- and public-sector grantmakers that are supporting arts for change work.

Page | 3

Animating Democracy | Americans for the ArtsEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Trend or Tipping Point: Arts & Social Change Grantmaking assembles a first-time portrait of arts
funders, social change funders, and others supporting civic engagement and social change througharts and cultural strategies. Focusing on grantmaking in the United States, the report aims tocharacterize the nature of support from both private and public sectors, examining how
grantmakers think about social change in the context of agency goals and what outcomes they arelooking for through their support. The report looks at the types of activities and projects that are
being funded as well as grantmaking strategies and structures. It documents obstacles andopportunities for greater support and, in its entirety, aims to advance both discussions about thisfield of work and support for it.
Across sectors, artists and arts organizations are increasingly being called upon to activate thesocial imagination to bring forth new ways to know and understand an increasingly complex
world. Social justice philanthropy on the whole is growing. Civic engagement, community
development, and social justice funders, as well as arts funders, have potential to expand anddeepen their support for this arena of work. Several contextual factors suggest the time is ripe for
fostering such support. The current environment has created a context for arts practitioners andfunders to consider the contributions of arts and culture to addressing social and civic concerns. A
sense of new possibilities for collaborations between the arts and other sectors to addressconcerns has been evident in convenings and inquiries motivated by funders and policy makers.
In 2009, Animating Democracy, a program of Americans for the Arts, with support from the
Nathan Cummings Foundation, Open Society Foundations, CrossCurrents Foundation, andLambent Foundation, launched the Arts & Social Change Mapping Initiative to respond to theseand related interests. In addition to this findings report, an online Directory of Funders identifies
and profiles more than 150 grantmakers that are supporting arts for change work.2
One objective of this study is to understand how funders use language to define the change they
aim to make, and how they interpret “social change” and “arts and social change” in relation totheir own missions and priorities. Therefore, for the purpose of this research, the definition of“social change” was left intentionally broad. The shorthand language of “arts for change” explicitly
encompassed civic engagement, community organizing, social change, social justice, participatory
democracy, community building, and community development.
An online survey of funders was implemented in late 2009 by the Research Department ofAmericans for the Arts. It was sent to 1,025 private- and public-sector funders; 228 responded(22.2 percent response rate). Of the 228 surveys returned, 186 were complete. Telephoneinterviews were conducted with 32 private sector funders, the majority of whom participated in
the survey. The Foundation Center’s report, Social Justice Grantmaking II: An Update on U.S.
Foundation Trends, released in 2009, provided context regarding the state of social justice2

The Funder Directory is available to grantmakers on the Animating Democracy website. Contact Animating
Democracy.

Page | 4

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
grantmaking in general, as did other reports issued by philanthropy affinity groups and individual
funders.
Who responded? More than 83 percent of respondents (157) either currently fund or plan tofund arts for change work. There was a near-even split between respondents operating in theprivate and the public sector. Analysis
showed that a little more than half of
respondents are arts funders (including
almost all of the public funders) andalmost a quarter are social change
funders. The highest response rates
were from local arts agencies (19.6
percent), private foundations (17.8
percent), state arts agencies (14.2
percent), and non-profit organizations
that make grants (13.3 percent).
Within the private sector category,
private foundations comprised 35
percent of responses; familyfoundations, 17 percent; andcommunity foundations and nonprofitsthat make grants each about 14
percent.

Findings: Impressions of theFunding Landscape
The America Project was conceived in 2001 by the late artist
Sekou Sundiata as a shared contemplation of America's national
identity. Public engagement activities—poetry circles,
community sings, citizenship cabarets, and potluck dinners—
involved campuses, communities, artists, and activists
nationwide in critical discussion about issues of citizenship andinformed the creation of the multimedia music-theater work thest
51 (dream) state (2006). The America Project continues under
the leadership of MAPP International Productions throughartist-led projects that empower people to explore the intricate
and powerful connection between their citizenship and theircreative voices. Photo by Julieta Cervantes.

Arts and social change philanthropy isan emerging field and therefore still
very much evolving. There is a wider
range and a larger number ofgrantmakers supporting arts for change
in some way than has been generally
recognized. They include every
grantmaker type. In the public sector, anumber of local and state arts agencies
have developed or are developing
more explicit programs to support artsfor change work.

Who is supporting this work? In the private sector, there are a small number of nationalfoundations supporting arts for change in an explicit way. Some, including the Open Society
Foundations, and Ford, Surdna, and Kresge Foundations, have recently shifted emphasis or are
currently exploring new or increased support for this work, often prompted by changes inPage | 5

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
foundation leadership and/or institutional shifts. However, growth in the private sector seems
most apparent among community foundations and smaller family, public, and private foundations.
Social justice funders that have truly institutionalized and/or integrated arts strategies are oftenfamily or private foundations, place- or issue-specific in their focus, and small enough in terms ofstaff size to foster cross-fertilization and collaboration within the foundation. Grantmaker affinity
groups pursuing identity-focused philanthropy, community development, specific social issues, or
progressive local-level grassroots funding are formally or informally exploring the role of arts inrelation to their affinity group’s change work.
Some arts funders are directing funds to arts for change in order to achieve more meaningfulcommunity or social outcomes or to reflect an agency-wide shift to support for community, civic,
or social change. Arts and culture are an ever-present dimension of Native or indigenous support,
but may not be viewed as a predominant driver. For social justice funders, arts and culture areoften just one of many strategies to make change. Some social justice funders view cultural
identity and cultural grounding as critical to empowerment of people to speak and act on theirown behalf and for social cohesion and community development. Others anchored in movementbuilding and community organizing may support the arts in service of mounting effective
messaging and communications strategies in advocacy or issue-oriented campaigns. Fewer havefully embraced artists as activists or have integrated artists’ contributions into community
organizing strategies, often reflecting limited understanding of the potential effectiveness of sucha wedding of practices.
Individuals are beginning to support the work as well through their own foundations, giving circles,
and an array of online opportunities. Across arts and social justice funding sectors, young
philanthropists who wish to extend their resources responsibly toward meaningful change arebeing seen as a viable new source of support.
What drives support of arts for change work? The number one reason for supporting the arts as a
strategy for change is a “belief in the power of arts for change,” supported by observations “thatthe arts advance change” and some “evidence that arts for change strategies work.” Funders
believe that the arts and artists can be tools or catalysts for change in addressing everything fromtranslating “complex policy issues” to “community organizing and youth development” to creating“new possibilities.”
What social or civic change is important to those supporting this work? Both private- and publicsector grantmakers consider “community building, building social capital, and social networking”
as “very important” outcomes in their work. In the public sector, local and state arts agencies’interests prominently relate to community development outcomes. More private- than publicsector respondents are concerned with policy-level change, possibly reflecting the participation ofsocial justice grantmakers that support community organizing, movement building, and specificadvocacy. Private funders also value intermediate capacity building outcomes that can contributelong-term to policy or systems change, such as “civic engagement,” “leadership development,”
and “increasing education and visibility for issues.”

Page | 6

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
In which issue areas are arts and cultural strategies being supported? Private and public sector
funders share five areas of concern in their arts for change grantmaking. Education and arts andcultural policy ranked highest. These were followed by race/ethnicity, civic participation/
engagement, and economic development/justice.
Many grantmakers assert that equitable cultural, education, and arts education access are
inherently social change or justice issues. Fundamental principles of cultural democracy—therights of cultures and peoples to define, sustain and perpetuate their own cultures—motivate
some giving. Public policy support of the arts is a predominant issue, especially among arts
funders.
Issues related to women and girls are supported by roughly a third of grantmakers surveyed;
however, interviewees observe that the arts are not yet widely recognized as a means for changeby the Women’s Funding Network. Lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender issues are also being
addressed through arts and culture by almost a third of grantmakers surveyed. About a quarter offunders are supporting arts and culture strategies around environmental and environmental
justice issues. Although immigration was not among the top issues identified by survey
respondents (32 percent private sector and 17.2 percent public sector), other evidence points tothis being an important and growing interest area.
What are barriers to supporting arts for change work? Based on the survey, the challenges mostoften cited were:Lack of funding or resources (35.1 percent private sector, 69.1 percent public sector): The
economic downturn almost certainly accounts for public sector responses, as 29.4 percent ofpublic sector funders also noted that “fiscal crisis” was a barrier they faced.
Unclear definitions or context for this work (24.7 percent private, 32.4 percent public): For manyreasons, grantmakers are wrestling with the labels and meanings attached to arts for change
work. The meaning of “social change” or “social justice” is unclear to many. Some funders
respond more readily to other language, such as “community development, community
building, civic engagement,” which more closely reflect their intents. The political connotationsof the language of social change and social justice present a barrier to some grantmakers. At thesame time, some funders who are concerned with movement building, policy change, and theultimate goal of equity believe the term “social justice” most accurately reflects their intentions.
Lack of understanding of the role of the arts as a change strategy (22.1 percent private, 25
percent public): Within social justice grantmaking organizations, board or staff members may
have little or no arts experience or knowledge base. They often struggle to understand exactly
how arts and culture integrate with community organizing strategies or long-term social change
efforts.
Lack of evidence of the value or impact of the arts as a strategy for achieving social/civic goals(16.9 percent private, 7.4 percent public): Multiple funders noted that funding arts for change
work is hindered by a lack of rigorous but accessible documentation, metrics for impact, andPage | 7

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
effective case making materials from the field. Arts funders feel the need for such evidence,
particularly when vying for public funds against other sectors. Although many social justicefunders have a more realistic view of what change can be expected, they are nonethelessconfronted with the realities of pressing issues that demand strategic support and want morecredible evidence of the arts’ contribution to change.
Beyond these most-often cited challenges, arts funders’ survey comments and interviews called
attention to the tensions surrounding a persistent question that may inhibit funding of arts forchange work: Is artistic quality somehow diminished when art takes on social or civic intention?

What Does Arts for Change Funding Look Like?
Support of arts for change work is happening largely through general grantmaking. Fifty-two
percent of all respondents are supporting arts for change work through general grantmaking, i.e.
grants not made through dedicated program areas or specific departments. Eighteen percent aresupporting arts for change through multiple or discrete program areas or departments. Project
support is the most common way that arts for change work is currently supported.
Categories of program funding in support of arts for change
Social justice or civic engagement
Programs that clearly support in a focused way community, social, or civic change through arts and culture strategies
Community-based arts infrastructure
Programs that advance community-based arts for change activity through organizational support, capacity building,knowledge building (such as documentation and dissemination or training programs), or networks
Youth development
Programs whose primary focus is youth development in a context of social change
Community development
Programs that support community building, community revitalization, placemaking, or neighborhood and economic
development as an explicit purpose
Culture as issue
Programs that articulate and support culture or arts as a social or civic issue in terms of: cultural democracy (therights of all cultures and peoples to define, sustain, and perpetuate their own cultures); cultural preservation(identity, traditions, and heritage sites); cultural representation (authentic and self-determined representation insuch public arenas as tourism); and/or cultural equity (access to funding and other resources that can help cultures
thrive)Disenfranchised or underserved populations
Programs that support opportunities to give voice to and advance the social, political, and/or economic status of
disenfranchised populations; includes programs that aim to ensure arts access to specific populations
Arts education as issue
Programs that support activities beyond traditional K-12 in-classroom arts education or arts education advocacy
efforts and connect with a community in ways that advance some defined public good or youth citizenry outcome

55 programs(46.2% )15 programs(12.6%)
11 programs(9.2%)
10 programs(8.4%)
10 programs(8.4%)

10 programs(8.4%)
7 programs(5.8%)

What are the implications of this study? The survey findings, interviews, and funder reportssuggest some largely positive trends that portray an expanding field.
A core of funders with integrated arts and social change missions is emerging. They see thathuman rights, equality, and other social justice goals can be advanced through creative
expression and cultural activism.

Page | 8

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
More arts funders, particularly state and local arts agencies, are addressing community,social, and cultural equity issues with changes to grant programs, guidelines, and allocations.
Grantmakers that support individual artists are following the leads of the artists anddeveloping ways to serve an increasing number of artists who devise projects with bothaesthetic and social dimensions.
Private place-based and community foundations are linking arts and culture funding tocommunity, neighborhood development, and civic engagement goals.
A small number of national foundations have stepped up to support special pilots andinitiatives; cross-sector exploration; and work, convenings, training, and documentation thatcan lead to stronger infrastructure for arts and social change work.
Next generation philanthropists and individual donors represent untapped sources of
support.
Federal resources are opening up through new initiatives of the Obama administration andthe leadership of the National Endowment for the Arts.
Expanding support for arts for change across of the different types of grantmakers cannot be donewith a broad-brush approach. Acknowledging the wide range of interests and the particularities
under the umbrella of “arts for change,” four key strands of interest in arts for change work seemto emerge:
Issue-specific causes, social justice, and cultural activism
Community development, community/civic engagement, and community arts
Cultural equity, arts access, and arts education
Support for artists
The following strategies—suggested by participants in the study and augmented by the authors—
address opportunities to stimulate grantmaking in both arts funding and community/social/civicchange sector funding.
1. Enhance grantmaker knowledge and practice
1a. Develop educational opportunities that can help drive interest, comfort, and readinessamong grantmakers who are not fully open to, or are just beginning to consider supporting, thiswork.
1b. Address specific concerns—whether real or perceived—of arts funders that may increase
the likelihood of their support.
1c. Undertake future studies of arts for change grantmaking that will provide the neededbaseline for tracking funding patterns.
2. Establish cross-cutting collaborations
Funding leaders can exercise their leadership to promote opportunities within or acrossphilanthropic segments or around particular issues.
2a. Foster cross-fertilization and collaboration within grantmaking organizations to promote
integrated support of arts for change work.
2b. Support on-the-ground cross-sector projects and learning opportunities for practitioners tobuild field capacity and field and funder knowledge.
Page | 9

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
2c. Leverage public funds from local, state, and federal non-arts agencies.
2d. Identify peer grantmakers and practitioners, and facilitate their coordinated efforts, bydeveloping Information and resources.
3. Cultivate nascent grantmakers and individual donors
3a. Nurture participation from next-generation and individual donors.
3b. Build practitioners’ capacities to utilize social media and networking to raise money throughonline contributions.
4. Increase visibility for arts for change work and develop evidence of impact
4a. Build capacity for evaluation that can provide evidence of the impact of arts for change
work.
4b. Individual funders can play an important role in building evaluation models for arts forchange work through their own initiatives.
4c. Increase visibility within relevant fields and the broader public for arts for change work.
This report can serve as a touchstone for discussions within grantmaking agencies and affinity
groups, and across funder types, as grantmakers consider new and renewed support of the arts asa strategy for change. It is the intention that the report and companion Funders Directory
illuminate and inform arts for social change philanthropy as it evolves in the short term, and thatits findings inform regular study of this field henceforth.

METHODOLOGY
The findings in this report are based upon information gathered from a combination of online
surveying, interviews, and review of select reports by funders and the Foundation Center.

Definitions
Arts: The definition provided for the arts was inclusive: “Arts may include creative process andproduct, any of the arts and humanities disciplines, and all forms of traditional, contemporary, andpopular culture.”Social change: For the purpose of this research, the funder survey was deliberately broad in
defining arts for social change. The survey invitation’s shorthand language of “arts for change”—
also used in this report—explicitly named a spectrum of outcomes that could be considered socialchange, including civic engagement, community organizing, social justice, participatory
democracy, community building, and community development.
It should be noted that one objective of this study is to understand how funders use language todefine the change they aim to make, and how they interpret “social change” and “arts and socialchange” in relation to their own mission and priorities. Therefore, the deliberately broad framing

Page | 10

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010of the survey left the door open to learning about as many funders as possible who consider theirwork to be contributing to social or civic change.
The definitional latitude complicated the analysis of data. In analyzing grantmakers’ missions andthe purpose and goals of their programs, generally, this study used a set of definitions—social
justice, civic engagement, community development, community building, cultural
democracy/equity—assembled by Animating Democracy for the Arts & Civic Engagement Impact
Initiative as a guide. (See sidebar.)
Definitions for terms of social change
Social justice reflects collective action to make change that ensures equity, access, and inclusion for
those who are least well-off politically, economically, and socially. Social justice seeks systemic change
in institutions and policies as well as socially upheld behavioral norms that foster fair treatment and ashare of benefits. This definition is drawn, in part, from Social Justice Grantmaking: A Report on
Foundation Trends (2005).
Civic engagement
Civic engagement refers to the commitment to participate in, and contribute to, the improvement of
one’s neighborhood, community, and nation. There are many ways in which people participate in civic,
community, and political life and, by doing so, express their engaged citizenship—from proactively
becoming better informed to participating in public dialogue on issues, from volunteering to voting,from community organizing to political advocacy. Civic engagement may be either a measure or ameans of social change, depending on the context and intent of efforts.
Community building
Community building may refer to the process of building relationships that helps community members
cohere around common purpose, identity, and a sense of belonging, which may lead to social orcommunity capital.
Community development
In community development, the economic, social, and physical dimensions of community are
considered, often together. Community development increasingly includes culture as one of these coredimensions and may also aim to advance youth development, health, recreation, human service, andother community goals.
Cultural equity/democracy
The Institute for Cultural Democracy describes the concept of cultural democracy as a set of related
commitments: protecting and promoting cultural diversity, and the right to culture for everyone in oursociety and around the world; encouraging active participation in community cultural life; enabling
people to participate in cultural policy decisions that affect the quality of our cultural lives; and assuring
fair and equitable access to cultural resources and support.
Source: Animating Democracy Arts & Civic Engagement Impact Initiative. IMPACT web site:
http://impact.animatingdemocracy.org/grounded/what-is-social-change

SurveyAn online survey of funders was implemented in late 2009 by Animating Democracy and the
Research Department of Americans for the Arts. A draft survey instrument was reviewed by asmall group of funders and revised before dissemination. It was sent to a total of 1,025 funders;
228 responded (a respectable 22.2 percent response rate). Of the 228 responses, 186 were
Page | 11

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
completed surveys and 42 were incomplete. The incomplete surveys are factored into the final
data for responses that were provided. (See Appendix 1 for a list of funders who participated in
the Arts for Change survey and Appendix 2 for the survey instrument.)
To reach private-sector funders, including private, family, corporate, and community foundations,survey invitations were sent to Grantmakers in the Arts (GIA) members, the Arts and Social Justice
Working Group and attendees of that group’s preconference programs at GIA. Twenty-five
relevant philanthropy affinity groups assisted in promoting and disseminating the survey. 3 Manyaffinity group leaders were generous in lending their perspectives on their segment’s activity inarts for change work. In addition, significant internet research was done to identify funders thathave supported known arts for change projects and organizations or generally indicated that theymight support arts for change work. A small number of individual donors and donor circles wereidentified and sent surveys.
Regarding public-sector funders, Americans for the Arts provided a list of state arts agencies, local
arts agencies with grantmaking programs and United Arts Funds,4 regional and national arts
organizations, and nonprofit arts organizations that make grants.
The survey focused primarily on funding agencies and did not aggressively investigate individual
donors supporting this work due to the difficulty identifying individual donors and unlikelihoodthat they would complete a survey. A small number of individual donors, donor-advised funds, anddonor or giving circles were sent the survey and, as expected, a small number responded. Followup interviews were conducted with donor-advised funds and donor circles to gain a sense ofindividuals’ motivations and perspectives.
In addition to questions regarding their funding of, and engagement with, arts for social change
work, the survey requested detailed information regarding specific programs that support arts forsocial change where they exist.

3

Funders' Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities, Jewish Funders Network, Asian Americans/PacificIslanders in Philanthropy, Emerging Practitioners in Philanthropy, Environmental Grantmakers Association, Funders'Committee for Civic Participation, Funders Concerned About AIDS, Funders for Lesbian and Gay Issues, Funders
Network on Population, Reproductive Health & Rights, The Funding Exchange, Grantmakers Concerned with
Immigrants and Refugees, Grantmakers In Health, Grassroots Grantmakers , Hispanics in Philanthropy, International
Funders for Indigenous People, International Human Rights Funders Group, Native Americans in Philanthropy ,Neighborhood Funders Group, Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement, Resource Generation, Fire This Time Fund
hosted by Crossroads Fund, Arts Rising, The Social Justice Philanthropy Collaborative, Women's Funding Network,
Funders Collaborative on Youth Organizing
4

United Arts Funds (UAF) are community-specific fundraising organizations that distribute contributed funds to thearts organizations in their communities. While these campaigns traditionally focus on corporate, individual, andworkplace giving, they also may include government support. According to Americans for the Arts, over the past 54
years, more than 100 communities across the country—both large and small—have established UAFs with more than
60 currently operating in the United States.

Page | 12

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

Interviews
Telephone interviews were conducted with 32 private-sector funders, the majority of whom
participated in the survey. Interviews were intended to gain deeper insights on survey responses
as well as to reach some types of funders who were not as well represented in the survey
responses. (See Appendix 1 for a list of those interviewed and Appendix 3 for the interview
protocol.)Review of Relevant Funding Reports
The Foundation Center’s report, Social Justice Grantmaking II: An Update on U.S. Foundation
Trends, released in 2009, provided context regarding the state of social justice grantmaking in
general, based on a 2006 study. This report updated a previous study conducted in 2002 andreported on in 2005. Although it includes limited attention to support for arts, culture, and media,
Social Justice Grantmaking II is referenced when its findings are pertinent to this study. Other
reports issued by philanthropy affinity groups and individual funders provided additional context.
(See Appendix 4.)

RESPONDENT PROFILE
Who Responded to the Survey?
More than 83 percent of respondents (157) either currently fund or plan to fund arts for change
work. Forty-five respondents (23.9 percent) answered that they do not currently fund arts forchange work. Respondents crossed all types of funders and represented both public and private
sectors.
Survey respondents hailed from 41 states and the District of Columbia. Geographically, most wereconcentrated on the east and west coasts. The four states with the most representation were New
York, California, Minnesota, and Illinois.

Page | 13

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
Figure 1 Respondents by Geographic Location

Public / Private Sector: Of the respondents that currently fund or plan to fund arts for change
work, there is a near-even split between respondents operating in the private sector (52 percent)and those in the public sector (48 percent). It should be noted that the survey did not include
federal arts and humanities agencies, or departments such as Justice, Health and Human Services,
Housing and Urban Development, and others that are supporting or have supported arts andculture strategies in support of agency goals.
Funder Type: Highest response rates were from local arts agencies (19.6 percent), private
foundations (17.8 percent), state arts agencies (14.2 percent), and nonprofit organizations thatmake grants (13.3 percent). (See Figure 2.)
High participation by local and state arts agencies may be due to their strong association as
Americans for the Arts constituents. A liberal interpretation of social change by local and state arts
agencies in relation to their grantmaking also accounts for the high response. For example, asignificant number of local and state arts agencies cited programs addressing diversity and accessto the arts and arts education as social change. Because many local arts agencies and some statearts agencies self-identified as “private-sector,” local and state arts agencies were removed fromthe private-sector findings to prevent skewed results.
Within the private-sector category, private foundations comprised 35 percent of responses; familyfoundations, 17 percent; and community foundations and nonprofits that make grants each about
14 percent. There was minimal response from corporations and corporate foundations; however,these comprised a smaller segment of the survey invitation list. (A full breakdown within private
and public sectors can be found in Figures D and E in the Statistical Report.)

Page | 14

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
Figure 2 Type of Funding Agency

Type of Funding Agency
Private foundation
Family foundation
Community foundation
Local Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
Regional arts organization
United Arts Fund
National arts organization
Nonprofit organization
Other
Individual donor
Donor advised fundCorporation
Out of 221 Responses

17.8%
7.6%
7.1%
19.6%
14.2%
2.7%
2.7%
1.3%
13.3%
9.8%
1.8%
1.3%
0.9%
0%

10%

20%

30%

The survey did not adequately capture either corporate or individual support where others
charting the field have noted activity; this was due to challenges in identifying individual donors
and corporations whose grantmaking activity supports arts for change. The Social JusticeGrantmaking II report suggests that corporate foundation support, while still modest, is notableparticularly in advancing “economic, housing, and educational opportunities for disadvantaged
minorities and other groups within the geographic areas in which they operate.” And the growing
proliferation of giving circles as well as online contributions indicates involvement of more andmore individuals, typically at a grassroots level, who are interested in supporting community andsocial change activities. These are only marginally reflected in the Arts for Change Funder datacollected, but worthy of a more complete look in future studies.
Arts funders / social justice funders: The survey did not explicitly ask grantmakers to self-define
as primarily an arts funder, social justice funder, or as a funder of both. However, a close review ofagency mission statements showed that 106 respondents (57 percent) are arts funders (including
almost all of the public funders); and 42 respondents (23 percent) are social change funders. A
noteworthy 30 grantmakers (16 percent) have missions that suggest they view and support artsfor change in an integrated way. The missions of six respondents (4 percent) would imply they
support arts and social change, but closer scrutiny indicates that arts support and social change
support are independent, not converging, interests.

Page | 15

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

FINDINGS
Impressions of the Funding Landscape
Arts and social change philanthropy is an emerging field. The study reveals a wider range and alarger number of grantmakers than has been generally recognized as supporting arts for change insome way. Funders of this work can be found among every grantmaker type—private, family,
corporate, and community foundations; local and state arts agencies; and nonprofits making
grants. Individuals are beginning to support the work as well, through their own foundations,giving circles, and an array of online opportunities.
If mission statements are one indicator, a significant percentage of grantmakers (16 percent) areintegrating arts with social, civic, or community change goals. Foundations such as those in theArts & Social Justice Working Group—Nathan Cummings, Leeway, Kentucky Foundation for
Women, Christensen Fund—are leaders in this segment. A small number of national private
foundations currently support this work and a few are moving more deliberately toward focused
support of arts for change. These national foundations tend to have both strong arts andcivic/social purposes underpinning their work.
In the private sector, growth seems most apparent among community foundations and smallerfamily, public, and private foundations. Social justice funders that have truly institutionalized
and/or integrated arts strategies are often family or private foundations, place- or issue-specific in
their focus, and small enough in terms of staff size to foster cross-fertilization and collaboration
within the foundation. Native American grantmakers were all counted as funders with integrated
missions because all acknowledge the relationship between arts, culture, community, and change
and their programs have more permeable boundaries for their grantees. (See sidebar for sample
mission statements of grantmakers that are integrating arts and change goals.)
In the public sector, some local and state arts agencies are working to support the power of artsfor community, civic, or social change by developing specific funding programs. A much larger
segment of these public sector funders claim support in this arena based on basic funding ofaccess to arts and culture, arts education, and diverse cultures as arts for change.
Therein also lies the elusive nature of the arts for change segment of philanthropy. A lack ofconsistent definitions of terms and the field’s different interpretations of those terms make it achallenge to identify, count, and characterize. Because this study did not require participants todefine themselves against rigid parameters, nor did it analyze a body of grants against
standardized criteria,5 it does not—for better or worse—offer what would be a desirable scientificbaseline. That will need to be done in a subsequent study.

5

The point of comparison here is the Social Justice Grantmaking II report issued by The Foundation Center which
employed a more scientific survey and grant analysis approach based on its aggregated data resources.

Page | 16

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
The field of support for arts for change is still very much evolving. The full findings that follow
unpack further these broader observations and expand the information with which stakeholders
can begin to get a better picture of the landscape of support of arts for change work.
Integrated arts and social, civic, or community change mission statements
The Aepoch Fund is a nonprofit organization providing funding, fiscal sponsorship, and otherresources to people, organizations and movements around the world engaged in transformational
work to create the conditions for all people and the planet to thrive. We see and support the powerfulrole that artists, healers and activists play in linking ecological, cultural, economic, and social issues tocreate viable solutions to our most complex and pressing challenges.
Art Matters is a foundation created to assist artists intending to break ground aesthetically andsocially. Support is provided to encourage exploration of issues and ideas; experimentation in visual
arts, media, and performance; and presentation of new art.
The mission of the Kentucky Foundation for Women is to promote positive social change by
supporting varied feminist expression in the arts.
Through innovative grantmaking and supported projects, Lambent Foundation explores and supports
the critical role of artists and contemporary art and culture as strategies for promoting progressive
social change.
The Leeway Foundation is a Philadelphia-based independent foundation that supports individual
women and transgender artists working toward individual and community transformation. We
envision a world where art is recognized as an essential part of the human experience; where it isemployed and respected as a powerful catalyst for personal and social change; and where women andtrans artists are honored as role models, mentors, and leaders.
The Stockton Rush Bartol Foundation believes in the intrinsic value of the arts to guide us inunderstanding, interpreting and communicating core aspects of our lives and community. We also
believe in the value of arts to educate young people and build strong communities. All people havethe right to be welcomed into arts practices and experiences that are high quality, relevant, andaccessible.

What Types of Funders Are Supporting Arts for Change?
Independent Foundations / Public Sector Funders / Nonprofit Grantmakers / Local and State
Arts Agencies
Of respondents who currently support or plan to support arts for change work, 34 percent are
independent foundations—private, family, community, and corporate—and 33 percent are stateand local arts agencies or United Arts Funds. Nonprofit organizations constitute 15 percent of
those who indicate they support arts for change work. (See Figure 3.)

Page | 17

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
Figure 3 Currently or Plan to Fund by Funder Type

There are a wider range and a larger number of funders than has been generally understoodthat are supporting arts for change in some way. The survey revealed 157 funders who are
currently funding or planning to fund arts for change work. Response to the survey as well as
willingness to be interviewed is evidence of increased attention to the potential for art to advancesocial justice funders’ goals. (See the Funders Directory for a list of respondents who currently
support or plan to support arts for change work.)
Some small family foundations and social justice funders have been under the radar. 6 They are
typically moved to support this work based on family members’ combined interests in the twoarenas. CrossCurrents Foundation and Compton Foundation are examples. CrossCurrents
Foundation observes that small family foundations can play a catalytic role, even when they do
not have large resources. They may also be more willing to take risks—for example, CrossCurrents
made a $10,000 grant to Split This Rock, a Washington D.C.-based poetry festival focused on social
issues. Receiving this first-ever grant lent credibility to Split This Rock, spurred subsequent support
from two national funders, and set in motion a trajectory in which the annual festival has evolved
to a functioning nonprofit. Among social justice- or community change- oriented funders, there
are signs of growing interest in “what it is that art can advance.” Some smaller social justicefunders such as the Quixote Foundation and Valentine Foundation responded even though theirsupport of arts and culture strategies may be indirect or only occasional. Although there arebarriers to overcome (see the section Barriers to Supporting Arts for Change), many funders
believe there is growing momentum.
6

Unless otherwise noted, the use of “small” to describe funding agencies reflects size of staff and not necessarily
amount of assets which may range from small to large.

Page | 18

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

At the 2008 Split This Rock Poetry Festival held at theWhite House in Washington, DC, poets spoke out throughpoetry for an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan andcalled on elected officials to imagine alternatives. Eachyear poets create a spontaneous group poem, a patchwork
made up of one line each from anyone who wants toparticipate. The resulting poems are powerful testimonies.
Photo by Jill Brazel.

A number of local and state arts agencies
have developed or are developing more
explicit programs to support arts for change
work. The focus may be broad, such as New
Mexico Arts’ grant program that supports
arts or social service organizations in theirefforts to address important social issues
through arts and culture; or it may be moreparticular, such as the Texas Arts
Commission’s Arts Respond program, which
supports projects that use art to prevent
juvenile delinquency and recidivism in youth
and adults. In addition to the better-known
San Francisco, Seattle, and St. Louis Arts
Commissions’ grantmaking in this arena,other local arts agencies are gradually
expanding to focus program funding onsocial and civic concerns, such as the Council
for the Arts & Humanities for Staten Island’s
immigration-related support.

National Foundations
Some major national foundations are exploring new or increased support for this work, often
prompted by changes in foundation leadership and/or institutional shifts. The Ford Foundation’s
recent past programs supported by the Media, Arts, and Culture portfolio—Animating Democracy,
Artography, and Future Aesthetics—have furthered the role of artists and art in civic engagement
and social change. The new Space for Change program administered by LINC (Leveraging
Investments for Creativity) even more explicitly links to the foundation’s and new president’ssocial justice agenda. It supports exemplary facilities-based arts organizations that are national
exemplars of artistic practice, innovative and equitable space development, and social justice.
Ford sees artist spaces as change agents in communities; they animate neighborhoods, contributeto cultural equity, create relationships across class and culture, and stimulate economies, while
offering space, tools, and conditions that allow artists to experiment and innovate. Ford is also
addressing issues related to media democracy and continues to support film and media projects
that relate to the foundation’s social justice interests.
Leadership change at the Kresge Foundation has prompted a shift away from its signature capitalchallenge grant program and toward a holistic examination of the nature of the organization’s
work and the impact it has. As it does so, the arts and culture program is testing potential strategic
directions that can result in maximum long-term impact. In addition to an Institutional
Capitalization program, the program is offering arts and culture resources through invitational andpilot areas of Arts and Community Building and Artist Support Services, which broadly strengthen

Page | 19

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
the role of artists and arts organizations in community life while informing where Kresge will
ultimately focus its resources.
The Open Society Foundations (OSF) has been exploring how its U.S. Programs can contribute todeveloping the depth and breadth of the field of art and culture and social justice work. This is inaddition to its existing Documentary Photography Project, which supports photography thatrecords human rights abuses, the effects of conflict, and the struggles and defiance ofmarginalized people, and in so doing reframes public discourse. OSF is supporting a small numberof projects and organizations to help advance their most innovative strategies around core threats
to open society in America. Priorities in its piloting phase are projects and organizations that viewart and culture and social change as inextricably linked; that advance work developed, guided, andgoverned by artists, organizers, community members, and other stakeholders; that employ atheoretical framework founded upon principles of social justice; that root core work intentionallyin terms of place and community while engaging in initiatives that integrate local, regional, andnational efforts; that promote network-building between art and culture practitioners, local
community members, change advocates, community organizers, and other stakeholders; and thatvalue collaboration, innovation, and intersectional approaches.
Grantmaker Affinity Groups
Several grantmaker affinity groups are formally or informally exploring the role of arts inrelation to their affinity group’s change work. Interviews with leaders of funder affinity groups of
the Council on Foundations provide insight into groups of like-minded funders, particularly thoseoriented to social and civic change. They could be characterized as those pursuing identityfocused philanthropy, community development, specific social issues, and progressive local-level
grassroots funding, with nascent interest in the small foundations and international human rights
sectors. (See sidebar.)

Page | 20

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

Funder Affinity Groups with Arts for Change Interests
Arts & Social Justice Working Group is a collection of private, public, and nonprofit funders who selfdefine as supporting arts for change. Its vision is “a world where artists and cultural workers arerecognized as planners, creative thinkers, organizers, educators and creators of works that catalyze
systemic social change and lead to lasting solutions that stabilize and strengthen our families,
communities and world.” Its mission is: “to grow the cohort of funders, cultural workers, consultants andartists whose work extends our understanding of diversity, justice and equality by increasing the resources
devoted to this work, building coalitions, fostering collaborations and disseminating research andinformation that will lead to a more just society.” The Working Group has a fluid membership of mostly
arts funders but some social justice funders whose individual change-oriented outcomes are articulated invarious ways, including: civic engagement, community building, community development, community
organizing, social change, social justice, and participatory democracy. The Arts & Social Justice Working
Group convenes annually for peer learning at the Grantmakers in the Arts conference.
Asian Americans /Pacific Islanders in Philanthropy (AAPIP) has observed through its members’ activities
how potently arts and culture work enables AAPI communities to articulate their issues, needs,
challenges, and assets. Among three current programs, AAPIP itself is providing resources to help arts
groups gain clarity about what their role is in the context of the social justice movement and how they
contribute to systemic change through arts and culture among other specific funding initiatives. AAPIP has
also been experimenting with the development of a network of giving circles at the grassroots level. Oneof these, the Asian Women Giving Circle, operates as a donor-advised fund of AAPIP and is currently
focused on support arts and activism.
Association of Small Foundations is a membership organization of more than 3,000 foundations with few
or no staff. ASF’s executive leader is personally very interested in the arts and indicated that civic
engagement is an interest, but also noted that confusion about the meaning of terms like “civic
engagement” is an obstacle for many funders.
Funders for Lesbian and Gay Issues described an “emerging focus and real interest” in the role of the arts
in advancing change on LGBT concerns. The leadership reflects that arts and culture have been “anincredibly important element of building an LGBT rights movement. …integral to how the queer
community has organized and nurtured itself.” Connecting the dots between culture and organizing is a
topic expected to be taken up in a future retreat. Two members of this affinity group—the Astraea
Lesbian Foundation for Justice and Horizons Foundation—responded to the survey and participated ininterviews.
Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities has, over the past several years,
proactively pursued an interest in the intersections between arts and community development andgrowth concerns. It has pursued relationships with peers in arts philanthropy in order to encourage morecross-sector work through presentations at Grantmakers in the Arts, collaboration with Grantmakers inFilm and Electronic Media, and by welcoming arts presentations at its own conference. Despite thisnetwork’s overarching interest, Funders’ Network leadership has not yet observed significant crossfertilization in foundations between program officers in arts and those in community development or
environmental issues.
The Funding Exchange is a growing network of 16 public foundations and a national office that together
grant nearly $15 million annually to progressive grassroots organizations working for social, racial,economic and environmental justice around the country. Although the Exchange does not have anarticulated arts strategy, several of its member foundations directly or indirectly support cultural strategies
for change through grantmaking. Four Funding Exchange members responded to the Arts for Change
survey—Appalachian Community Foundation, Chinook Fund, McKenzie River Gathering Foundation, andthe San Diego Foundation for Change.

Page | 21

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

Grantmakers Concerned with Immigrants and Refugees (GCIR) seeks to move the philanthropic field toadvance the contributions and address the needs of the world's growing and increasingly diverse
immigrant and refugee populations. There are “a handful” of members within this affinity group that
support arts and culture explicitly as a strategy for change. However, an interest in the potential for artsand culture has surfaced quite explicitly in studies such as Pursuing Democracy’s Promise, The Art ofCommunity, and Investing in Our Communities: Strategies for Immigrant Integration. GCIR typicallyintegrates social change arts, performance, and film into its biennial national conference.
Grantmakers in Film + Electronic Media (GFEM) is committed to advancing the field of media arts andpublic interest media funding. GFEM serves as a resource for grantmakers who fund media content,
infrastructure, and policy, those who employ media to further their program goals as well as acollaborative network for funders who wish to learn more about media. GFEM members have a broad
range of interests and approaches, but share the view that electronic media is a vital form of humanexpression, communication, and creativity, and plays a key role in building public will and shaping civilsociety. In 2010, GFEM published a field study, Funding Media, Strengthening Democracy: Grantmaking
for the 21st Century, which addresses the social change role that media play and specifically takes up
issues of assessing social impact, among other issues.
Grassroots Grantmakers serves as a locus for learning for place-based funders who are supporting active
civic engagement at the block level with the goal of advancing change agendas that have been identified
and shaped by community residents. Although the network has not, on the whole, pursued arts interests,
there is notable art-related activity happening through grantees’ grassroots, place-based work—murals,
arts to strengthen community identity, public art, signage, dance, music. A significant amount of arts areprograms for youth. While most Grassroots Grantmaker members offer small grants ($500-1,000), The
Cleveland, Denver and, Skillman Foundations are among larger foundations supporting arts through theirsocial change grantmaking. Grassroots Grantmakers has presented a panel at the Americans for the Arts
conference on the use of neighborhood narrative as an effective vehicle in a social change agenda.
There is no collective movement toward arts as a strategy within the civic engagement affinity groups
although some individual grantmakers support such work. Members of the Funders Committee for Civic
Participation (FCCP) who participated in the survey include: Akonadi, Arca, CrossCurrents, Ford, James
Irvine Foundations, and the Open Society Foundations and Pew Charitable Trust. Philanthropy for Active
Civic Engagement’s executive and board leadership support the notion of arts as a strategy for change andhave participated in Americans for the Arts National Arts Policy Roundtable on Arts & Civic Engagement.

Individual Donors
Individuals are increasingly making donations directly to arts for change activity. Funding
agencies are not necessarily the only source for funds. Work is getting funded in very direct ways
through online contribution mechanisms. United States Artists (USA), a grantmaking, artistadvocacy organization dedicated to supporting America’s finest artists working across diverse
disciplines, is testing Project Site. This initiative will facilitate dialogue and sharing between its
grantee artists and “those that love and support them” and enable anyone to make direct taxdeductible donations of any size to new projects created by each artist. Work is also supported byindividual donors; for example, the temporary city-wide exhibitions and public art that take onsocial themes developed by independent curator Nora Halpern and by Creative Time. In the
documentary and narrative film world, there is a notable movement of “Filmanthropy,” in which
individual donors such as Jeff Skoll, first president of eBay, and Sheila Johnson, co-founder of BET(Black Entertainment Television), produce films that get a social message out through fact or
fiction. These individual donors may also create and/or support significant campaigns to motivate
public action in relation to the films.

Page | 22

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
Donor circles (or giving circles) are a growing alternative model of individual support. Interviews
with leaders of donor circles focused on arts and social change. A review of the report More Giving
Together: The Growth and Impact of Giving Circles and Shared Giving, published by the Forum ofRegional Associations of Grantmakers (2009), offers evidence that giving circles are providing
individual donors of varied means and interests a way to contribute dollars and make decisions
about investments that affect the places and issues that matter to them. Most giving circles
operate locally and at a grassroots level although some have evolved into sophisticated staffed
entities. The Zing Foundation’s Christopher Ellinger co-founded the Arts Rising Circle and has along history of working with donor circles. He explains why donor circles can work. “If more
people with wealth felt powerful, they would be giving away a whole lot more money. …People
tend to be philanthropically reactive rather than proactive. They often feel disengaged in theirgiving. Donor circles offer people a partnership in which they’re helping them engage with eachother and with the project leaders to make better decisions about what’s important to support.
Many donors grow bolder and more fulfilled when they are part of a donor community thatreinforces them.” (See sidebar for three snapshots of arts and social change giving circles.)Although their mostly volunteer base can pose challenges and although economic and personal
circumstances can affect member retention, successful circles have tried to maintain simplicity
and a social factor that keeps people interested and newcomers joining.
Next Generation Philanthropists
Young philanthropists are critical participants and leaders in arts for change work and havepotential to be contributors as well as to influence the ways this work is supported. Across artsand social justice funding sectors, young philanthropists are being seen as a viable new source of
support. There are 26 donor circles made up entirely of donors under 40, according to the More
Giving Together report). Young people of wealth who wish to extend their resources responsibly
toward meaningful change are another source. However, Taij Kumarie Moteelall, an artist-activist
and former executive director of Resource Generation, an organization that provides this cohort
with a peer network and learning opportunities, observes, “while many next generation funders
are engaged in social justice, only a few have championed the role of the arts in a serious way.” At
the same time, she believes that “through donor education this generation could be inspired byand connected to the transformative power of the arts as a tool for social justice.” Members ofAmericans for the Arts’ Emerging Leaders group, some of whom are or will be leading public arts
agencies, running grant programs, or moving on to other opportunities to give resources, express
their commitment to cultural equity and to applying the power of the arts to issues in theircommunities.
“There is a real excitement around this field and this work. Young people are feeling thatit’s almost mandatory at the beginning of their careers to get involved in this work.”
Claudine Brown, former director, Arts and Culture,
Nathan Cummings Foundation

Page | 23

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

Three Arts & Social Change Giving Circles
According to the Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers, “giving circles *or donor circles+
are a vehicle in which individual donors pool their money and other resources and decide together
where to give them away. They have emerged over the last decade as a growing and significant
philanthropic trend among donors of all wealth levels and backgrounds. They range from a group ofneighbors meeting around a kitchen table to formal organizations to loose networks. A circle
develops its pool of funds from any combination of members’ own donations, fundraising events
they produce, and solicitations from other individuals, businesses, or resources.
Studies by the Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers have shown that the number ofgiving circles has exploded across the country since 2000 and that they are “here to stay.” A 2007
Forum study entitled More Giving Together identified more than 400 donor circles engaging morethan 12,000 donors, giving close to $100 million over the course of their existence. Many aresupporting local efforts to address social issues; the top eight out of 17 issue areas in the mostrecent study were: women and girls (49 percent), education (43 percent), youth development (33percent), health and nutrition (30 percent), community improvement and capacity building 26
percent); arts, culture and humanities (25 percent); housing (21 percent); and the environment (20percent).
A review of several social justice oriented donor circles that responded to the Forum’s survey showsthat several support arts-based activities geared to social change. Here are three devoted
exclusively to an integrated vision of arts and social change.
Fire This Time Giving Circle (FTT) in Chicago, now in its fifth year, is an all-volunteer, independent
giving circle that supports small-scale, creative social change projects. Projects are initiated by local
artists, educators, and organizers who weave an analysis of racial, economic, social, environmental,
or gender justice into their work. It has about a dozen core members—artists, activists, andeducators—and supports creative change efforts that are not typically receiving funding from othersources. It has granted approximately $40,000 total to date, giving about a dozen $500 to $1,000
grants annually. FTT was originally housed at Crossroads Foundation but now operates
independently.
Asian Women’s Giving Circle: AWGC describes itself as a “motley crew of Asian women in New York
City ranging in age from 20 to 70 and representing a wide range of cultures, ethnicities, andprofessions.” Recognizing a general lack of philanthropic support to Asian American communities, acore of women each contribute $2,500 to a pool that is supplemented by contributions from 150
others; funds are granted to social change projects in New York City led by Asian women. This circle
makes annual grants totaling $75,000. Since 2005, it has raised and distributed more than $270,000
to Asian women using arts and culture to achieve social justice goals. The Asian Women’s Giving
Circle is a donor-advised fund of Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders in Philanthropy.
Arts Rising Giving Circle: The mission of Arts Rising is to build a community of people excited tosupport social change arts with money and time. The circle, which operated for two years (20072009) out of the Threshold Foundation, recognizes the arts as a powerful, under-used force forchange. Over two years, 80 individuals contributed to the Arts Rising Circle (a required minimum of$1,000) with 50 people actively involved. Founding members also leveraged some larger gifts from acouple of foundations. It distributed 20 grants totaling $234,000. In 2010, Arts Rising chose to focus
on capacity building for the social impact theater network called Playback Theatre.

Page | 24

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

What is the Scope of Funding for Arts for Change Work?
Explicitness of Support“We don’t think of ourselves as ‘arts for change’ funders. We support creativity,
innovation, and problem solving for the common good. Our approach is cross-sector. We
believe that the arts play an important role in community building.
Claire Peeps, The Durfee Foundation
Funders are often supporting arts for change work without explicitly labeling it in those terms. In
their grantmaking materials, most funders do not explicitly frame support of the arts as a strategy
for making change (57.3 percent public and 48 percent private funder respondents). (See Figure4.) Many may support such work directly or indirectly but it is not an expressed priority or
criterion. Others are tentative about language. Private-sector funders sometimes frame cautiously
because of conservative or risk-averse trustees. Community foundation arts officers indicated that
attracting arts donors to the foundation using a social justice frame is challenging. One community
foundation officer indicated that her foundation has been deliberate in omitting social change
language, saying that “all organizations in my portfolio are engaged in social change work.
However, we have, as a foundation, yet to come out and communicate in this way. Instead, ourstrategy focuses on increasing arts participation in underserved communities by supporting
community-based organizations. These organizations are inherently engaged in social change
work and yet…we have not come out and stated this.”Figure 4 How Available Funding is Described

Page | 25

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

As public agencies, local and state arts agencies and United Arts Funds also often deliberately do
not articulate “social change” or “social justice” goals because of concerns that public funds
cannot be associated with advocacy or cause-oriented activities.7
Frequency of Support
Most respondents that are supporting arts for change work report that they are doing so on aregular basis but very few are exclusively supporting this work. More than half (53.9 percent) saythat they regularly support arts for change work and about a third (31.4 percent) occasionally
support it. Only 7.7 percent exclusively support this work and the majority who exclusively fundare private foundations. (See Figure 5.)
Figure 5 Frequency of Arts for Change Grantmaking

Funders committed to this work often encourage others to commit their support. Frank Baiocchi,
program officer of the Chicago-based Polk Bros. Foundation, observes, “Sharing stories about how
participation in arts learning processes has positively impacted clients involved in workforce
development, youth and family counseling, and education programs helps funders who typicallysupport these other areas [to] understand the value of the arts as a vehicle for individual andsocial development.” He notes the work of the Chicago Arts Education Collaborative, a group ofalmost 20 funders who have been meeting for many years to improve and expand arts learning for
Chicago public school students. “Recently we in the Collaborative have started to reach out toother funders to include them in conversations about why access to arts education can add a vital
component to any portfolio of grantmaking concerned with social justice issues and/or acommitment to building sustainable communities.”

7

Organizations such as Americans for the Arts and Alliance for Justice have worked to dispel common
misunderstandings related to advocacy for both nonprofit organizations and public agencies although they often still
persist.

Page | 26

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

Amount of Support
Information available from this study makes it difficult to gain a reliable sense of the amount offunding going to arts for change work. Based on the 102 respondents who reported the amountof money for arts for change work granted in their most recently completed fiscal year, the total
was close to $133 million ($132,432,686). There are, however, many qualifications to this figure.
First, this question was optional; about 33 percent of those who fund the work did not answer thequestion, including funders who explicitly support arts for change work. Second, it is not clear
what portion of a funder’s grantmaking is reflected in the figure provided. Many figures may beapproximate, either low or high. It is probable that some respondents reported on more than thearts for change support they provide, e.g., giving the entire budget of the arts funding program
rather than the portion devoted specifically to arts for change. Others have probably
underreported; for example, a program officer might report only for his/her program when otherfoundation departments are also supporting this work. On the whole, it is likely that the totalreported amount reported is lower than the actual amount of support.
Figure 6 Estimated Total Funding for Arts for Change Work (Most Recent Fiscal Year)

Estimated Total
Funding Dollars

Funder Type

Number of
respondents

Private and Private Operating Foundations$57,002,191

25

State Arts Agencies$32,720,000

30

Local Arts Agencies, Public and Private, United
Arts Funds$26,396,625

10

Nonprofits making grants$6,572,00018Community Foundations and Donor-Advised
Funds within Community Foundations$2,612,500

8

Family Foundations$2,219,000

8Individual Donors$2,530,000

2$800,0001$1,580,370

2$132,432,686102

Corporate Foundations
Other (public foundation, philanthropic affinity
group)
TOTAL

Page | 27

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
It should also be noted that seven agencies’ figurescomprise 56 percent of the $134 million reported ($15
and $20 million from two major private foundations, $16
million from a state arts agency, and $5 to 7 million dollar
figures from four local or state arts agencies). Thesefigures are likely full agency or departmental resources
and not specific to arts for change support. To secure
more reliable information that includes a baseline forfunds granted for this work, a formal grant analysis such as
the one conducted by the Foundation Center for the Social
Justice Grantmaking reports should be conducted in the
future.

What Drives Support of Arts for Change Work?
Across funder types, the number-one reason forsupporting arts as a strategy for change is a “belief in the
power of arts for change” (83.3 percent private funders,86.8 percent public). This belief is supported byobservations “that the arts advance change” (76.9 percent
private, 67.1 percent public) and some “evidence that artsfor change strategies work” (59 percent private, 63.2
percent public). Not surprisingly there is a good mission fit
for this work among funders who exclusively or regularly
support it. Among “other” reasons for supporting the work
mentioned by private-sector funders was that the arts andartists can be tools or catalysts for change in addressing
everything from translating “complex policy issues” to“community organizing and youth development” tocreating “new possibilities.” (See Figure 7. See also Figures
W, X, Y, and Z in the Statistical Report for Reasons for
Supporting the Work by specific funder type.)

Page | 28

Social Justice Grantmaking II:
Amount of Support
The 2009 Social Justice Grantmaking
II report (based on 2006 data)
provides context for the social justicefunding sector.
Based on all grants of $10,000 or
more awarded by a sample of 871
larger foundations, social justicegiving by the subject/field of “arts,
culture, and media” constituted 1.6
percent of funds given, ranking 13thout of 15 fields. Within social justicerelated arts, culture, and media, thelargest shares of funding supported
increased minority participation in
performing arts education,
journalism, and other media; social
justice-related memorials andmuseums; and programs fostering
cultural and ethnic awareness.
Dollars granted by the arts, culture,and media field totaled $36,365,580,
reflecting 251 grants awarded.
The median grant amount for arts,
culture, and media was $30,000,
falling below the overall median of$45,000 for the social justice sample.
Of the 25 largest social justice funders
identified by the Foundation Center
study, only four overlap with the Arts
for Change survey respondents—John
S. and James L. Knight Foundation,
Ford Foundation, Open Society
Foundations, and Joyce Foundation.
Of the 50 largest funders by share ofgiving for social justice identified in
the Social Justice Grantmaking IIreport, five overlap with the Arts for
Change survey respondents—Ford,
Open Society Foundations, Compton
Foundation, Joyce Foundation, andMertz Gilmore—and another three
are generally known to support artsfor change.

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

Figure 7 Reasons for Supporting Arts for Change Work

Some arts funders are directing funds to arts for change in order to achieve more meaningfulcommunity or social outcomes. Some shifts occur in the context of program assessment or agency
strategic planning. One donor-advised fund saw the need to more strategically focus what had
been “a hodgepodge of *arts+ grants representing advisory board pet interests” and is now
directing arts resources to improve the lives of at-risk youth. The San Diego Foundation’s arts andculture program has refocused its priorities to reflect an agency-wide shift to support civic
engagement. With “modest resources,” the arts program’s strategy is to invest in multi-year
funding in a small number of arts organizations that already have civic engagement embedded intheir missions and demonstrate the greatest capacity for effecting community and civic change.
Two family foundations, the Flint-based Ruth Mott Foundation and the New York City-based
Surdna Foundation—one local and one national—realigned their arts support to addresscommunity building and social change respectively. (See sidebar.)

Page | 29

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

Assessing its first ten years of arts support, the Ruth Mott Foundation is redirecting support tocommunity arts and culture. The foundation believes that its “values of inspiring local hope andpride, increasing community engagement and collaboration, and promoting fairness and justicecan be achieved with most potent impact through the place-based and community building
qualities at the core of community arts.” The Community Change component of the new program
encourages projects that build relationships, foster dialogue, employ creative place-making andother arts strategies in neighborhood and downtown revitalization, and addressing issues related
to the foundation’s other focus areas of health and beautification.
In 2009, the Surdna Foundation updated its mission to focus on the creation of just andsustainable communities—communities guided by principles of social justice and distinguished byhealthy environments, strong local economies, and thriving cultures. Building on the former Arts
Program’s fifteen-year engagement in support of teens’ artistic advancement, Surdna’s new
Thriving Cultures program endeavors to strengthen the critical role that artists and arts and othercultural organizations play in fostering just, sustainable communities. One new line of work,“Artists Engaging in Social Change,” recognizes the power of artistic imagination to raiseawareness and deepen our understanding of seemingly intractable social problems (e.g., regarding
race, economic and cultural inequity); help those whose stories are not often heard to gain apublic voice; and build community by helping to develop innovative solutions and inspiring
community members to action. Funding aims to strengthen the capacity of artists, arts and othercultural organizations in communities across the country to effectively engage in social change;and support and heighten awareness of the diverse roles artists can play in social change efforts.
Funders of individual artists are wary of funding programs that impose expectations of community
engagement or social change but they respect and support those artists who choose to work
intentionally toward social and civic goals. The Jerome Foundation and Creative Capital were
explicit that they do not want to impose any external directions as more important than theartist’s own impulse. Yet they were able to cite examples of having funded artists who have social
or civic intention at the heart of their work. “Some artists’ work bridges sectors. The hybrid artists
don’t want to be constrained by one sector or another,” said Creative Capital’s Ruby Lerner.
Whether their work relates to creative organizing strategies to promote environmental clean-up
or to giving voice to homeless populations in public policy debates, she went on to say, “We don’t
want to be in a position of denying the full range of knowledge and talents they have.”
The idea of bridging has guided the Lambent Foundation’s focus and goals. Lambent’s Michelle
Coffey reflects, “With our 10-year history of funding social justice movement building andalternative art spaces via a donor-advised fund, we witnessed a disconnect of ‘hearts and minds’
within current U.S. movement building, even though there is a strong belief in the power of art.”
Lambent was created to elevate the critical role of artists, contemporary art, and culture as a
strategy, alongside organizing and advocacy, for promoting democratic ideas, human rights, andprogressive social change. It is committed to art spaces that support individual artists,
contemporary art practice, and cultural organizations in New York, New Orleans, and Nairobi,
cities where art and culture are intrinsically woven within the daily fabric. While understanding
Page | 30

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
the value of both community-based arts and “art for art’s sake,” Lambent’s intention is to support
the intersections between art, culture, and social justice movements through grant making andcreative programming.
Like grantmakers who support individual artists, indigenous peoples’ funds often take the leadfrom artists to the degree that artists are engaging in arts for change work. Funders that support
indigenous communities and issues respect the integral role of culture in the social, political, andeconomic dimensions of life as well as the right to self-determined cultural expression that haslargely gone unsupported by the dominant culture. Arts and culture are an ever-present
dimension of Native or indigenous support, but may not be viewed as a predominant driver.
Native artists may wear many hats in the community and so repeatedly receive funds from manysources for one project. Drawing on Native understanding, these funders also think more longterm about impacts. Native artists working to make change may not expect to see it in their own
lifetimes, this being in tune with a sense of evolution and generational change. Some Native
grantmakers have found that the funders who support them work in more siloed ways and impose
expectations for rapid results that challenge their ability to fund with a more holistic perspective.
Native funders believe that a look at their grantmaking practices and frames may inform arts andother grantmakers.
Social justice funders are motivated by varied experiences and values regarding how art
contributes to advancing their goals. Some social justice funders support the arts as just one ofmany strategies to make change. Others anchored in movement building and community
organizing may support the arts in service of mounting effective messaging and communications
strategies in advocacy or issue-oriented campaigns. Fewer have fully embraced artists as activists
or have integrated artists’ contributions into community organizing strategies. There is a lack ofunderstanding of the potential effectiveness of such a wedding of practices.
“*Our+ grantmaking is guided by our understanding of how social change and movements
for social justice develop. Our theory and practice are rooted in the following beliefs: Socialchange results from the powerful collective action of groups of people working together.
Art and cultural work are powerful tools for resistance and inspiration. Communities thatare most affected are best positioned to identify priorities.”
Mai Kiang, Astraea Lesbian Foundation for JusticeSome social justice funders view cultural identity and cultural grounding as critical to empowering
people to speak and act on their own behalf and for social cohesion and community development.
The Akonadi Foundation provides general operating support for key cultural organizations because
they strengthen social bonds within and across different racial and cultural communities.
Support of media is a dominant strategy for advancing change, especially among social justicefunders. Among artistic disciplines film, and documentary film in particular, is supported as apotent vehicle for conveying issues and because there is potential to reach a large audience via
broadcast, theatrical distribution, and/or internet dissemination, as well as targeted reach as partof focused community organizing and activist strategies. Grantmakers in Film and Electronic Media

Page | 31

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
(GFEM) commissioned a 2010 field study 8 that GFEM director Alyce Myatt hopes will enhancegreater understanding within the field about the media’s role in shaping attitudes and moving
people to action. “So many of the positive social changes foundations wish to see can be
expedited using tried-and-true media tools and by putting a face on an issue through movingimage media.”
In an interview for this study,
Myatt observed that there issomething of a split between
those that fund “film for film’ssake” and those that fund “filmfor social change.” She believes
that most media funders do notsee media as art but rather as ajournalistic, information, or
messaging vehicle. Smaller familyfoundations often have aparticular passion for media andfocus their funds on issue-based
projects that match their social
concerns. The focus on issue
The State of Things, a two-ton ice sculpture of the word “democracy,”melted at the 2008 Democratic and Republican Conventions in Denverand St. Paul. In their work, artists Nora Ligorano and Marshall Reese
aim to stimulate public discourse around socio-political issues inunlikely venues and using new media with sculpture. Photo by Nora
Ligorano.

often overrides creative or
aesthetic investigation. Myattsays, “We’ve been working tobring the art piece back tomedia.”

Funders such as the Sundance Institute, the LEF Foundation, and Pacific Pioneer Fund value artistic
exploration as well as a film’s potential to contribute to change-making strategies. As Cara Mertesof the Sundance Institute explains, media can “offer stories that entertain, inspire, provoke andresonate with what it means to be a human being facing the challenges of the 21st century.” Other
agencies such as the Environmental Media Fund, which works with filmmakers to resource theirprojects, see media as a potent catalyst to heighten awareness of, or deepen knowledge about,issues or to mobilize networks for action.
“We believe that media and culture and public policy are ultimately inseparable. And
although it is often impossible to draw precise relationships of cause and effect, media is
instrumental in laying the groundwork for broad-based public policy change.”
Robert Silvestri, Environmental Media Fund
8

Funding Media, Strengthening Democracy: Grantmaking for the 21st Century, was commissioned and published in2010 by Grantmakers in Film and Electronic Media, researched and written by Peter B. Kaufman and Mary Albon of
the firm Intelligent Television, and made possible by grants from the Ford Foundation, the Haas Charitable Trusts andthe John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Available at www.gfem.org.

Page | 32

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

Grantmakers are increasingly collaborating with each other and with grantees in arts for change
work to achieve greater impact on challenging social and civic issues. Committed funders often
help to identify synergies and make connections on the ground and they can facilitate
experimentation at the intersection of arts and community change. The Pabst Charitable Trust, an
arts funder, is partnering with local foundation colleagues in other sectors as a way to infuse arts
strategies in projects related to issues of community wellness. The Center for Cultural Innovation,a nonprofit support organization for artists, relayed plans to design a new funding program thatwill identify and fund artists alongside other social innovators who are making positive changes intheir local communities. “It is our hope,” said Director Cora Mirikitani, “that by integrating, rather
than segregating artists in this way, the public will have a greater understanding and appreciationof the impact that artists can have as social change agents.”“Rather than starting with the art, we start with the community need [and ask] what would
be some interesting community partnerships?”
Margery Pabst, Pabst Charitable Foundation
There is growing sentiment among some grantmakers committed to social change that working inconsort with grantees can amplify effect. Ken Grossinger and Micheline Klagsbrun of the
CrossCurrents Foundation bring to their grantmaking their respective insights and experience asorganizer (Grossinger) and artist (Klagsbrun). “Because of our backgrounds, it’s easy to imagine*connections between the two+,” said Grossinger. In addition to providing financial resources, they
advise on projects when possible; for example, they might connect an established advocacy
organization with an artist on one civic engagement project and help artists to devise strategic
timing and a communications strategy on another.
The complexity and scale of social concerns can demand coordinated efforts among funders. In
Charlotte, NC, the need for broad-based and sustained community action around issues ofinterracial trust and the future of this changing Southern city has prompted a strategic partnership
between the Foundation for the Carolinas, a community foundation, and the Knight Foundation, aprivate foundation. Together, they are supporting an ongoing initiative called Crossroads
Charlotte. (See sidebar.)
Donor collaboratives enable donors to pool resources to address larger concerns. The Media
Democracy Fund, based at the Proteus Fund, says grantmakers are becoming increasingly aware of
the pervasive effect of communications policies on everyday lives and recognize the imperative to“actively work together to ensure that the rules governing digital communications serve
everyone.” The Fund—which grew out of a collaborative research effort by the Ford Foundation,
the Phoebe Haas Charitable Trust, and the Albert A. List Foundation on how to increasephilanthropic investment in the area of media policy and reform—supports advocacy groups
working to create a just media environment and democratic media policy.

Page | 33

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

Crossroads Charlotte: Partnership in Action
What course will Charlotte-Mecklenburg chart for all its residents over the next 10 years as it
deals with issues of access, equity, inclusion and trust in the social, political, economic, andcultural life of the community?
This question is at the heart of Crossroads Charlotte, a long-term, community-wide initiativethat has commanded a significant partnership of funders and community leaders. In 2001,
Charlotte, NC was one of 40 communities that participated in Harvard Professor Robert
Putnam’s Social Capital Benchmark Survey. The survey presented a disconcerting result: While
Charlotte is heavily engaged in faith-based giving and volunteerism, at the same time residents
are distrustful and intolerant of people unlike themselves. This was particularly alarming for a
new-South city that has struggled for decades with Black and White issues, and now finds itself
growing rapidly more diverse, with an exponential rise in Latino and Asian populations.
With the vision, leadership, and resources of Foundation for the Carolinas, the coordination of
the nonprofit Community Building Initiative, input from scores of community leaders, andmajor funding provided by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, Crossroads Charlotte
was conceived. With an emphasis on creating a community that is accessible to all, inclusive
and equitable, the goal of Crossroads Charlotte is to build a trusting, vibrant and sustainable
home.
The initiative centers around four plausible stories about Charlotte’s future. Concerned thatconventional meetings and discussions would not attract or sustain interest, Crossroads
Charlotte organizers determined that stories could more potently paint future scenarios as thebasis for community dialogue and action. Organizers say that the initiative truly came alive andwent deep when local poets developed poetic responses to the stories and performed these aspart of community discussions of the stories.
Since 2005, these stories have launched countless focused opportunities for organizations,institutions, and people across the community to participate in defining and acting on
Charlotte’s future from their own institutional and personal vantage points. The first phasehelped develop an organizational capacity for change and cultivate essential leadership for
community change. The second phase spurs public will for positive change and generates a
demand for sustainable change. With the help of the Arts & Science Council of CharlotteMecklenburg as another partner, the arts continue to be integrated into Crossroads Charlotte
activities.

Who is Receiving Support?
More than half (55.4 percent) of grantmakers supporting arts for change make grants to botharts and community organizations. About a third of respondents (32.5 percent) directly support
artists and/or arts organizations whose work aims for social change. Another 12 percent ofrespondents support social change or community organizations that may include art and artists intheir change-making strategies. (See Figure 8.)

Page | 34

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
Figure 8 Eligible Funding Recipients

What Types of Social or Civic Outcomes Are Most Important to Funders?
All grantmakers, whether they support arts as a strategy for change or not, were asked to rate 14
different civic and social outcomes in terms of the importance of each in their overall grantmaking(that is, grantmaking not necessarily linked to arts strategies).
Among both private- and public-sector grantmakers, the outcomes most often rated “veryimportant” are “community building, building social capital, and social networking.” 9 (SeeFigures 9 and 10.) This outcome cluster received the highest response rate of all choices (55percent private, 67.4 percent public). That the arts are viewed as effective in building communityand social capital is a key reason that arts grantmakers believe they are supporting change
through their arts grantmaking. From the research of sociologist Robert Putnam, the Urban
Institute, and the Social Impact of the Arts Project at the University of Pennsylvania, these types ofoutcomes often have been cited as ones in which the arts and culture are particularly effective.10

9Social capital refers to the social resources possessed as a result of one’s social networks formed throughconnections and relationships within and between groups and individuals. Social capital may include: trust, inclusion,access, group efficacy, and status. Social networking is a grouping of individuals (or organizations) that are connectedby one or more types of interdependency, such as friendship, kinship, common interest, or relationships of beliefs,
knowledge, etc. Social networking occurs in person as well as through online communities.
10

In addition, Animating Democracy’s research of 36 arts-based civic dialogue projects across the country (Civic
Dialogue, Arts & Culture: Findings from Animating Democracy, 2005) as well as its recent Arts & Civic Engagement
Impact Initiative (“Arts and Civic Engagement: Briefing Paper” by M. Christine Dwyer, 2008)) shows that thesecommunity and civic capacity building outcomes are among the most commonly defined and actually achieved in artsbased civic engagement endeavors.

Page | 35

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
Figure 9 Importance of Civic and Social Outcomes in Overall Grantmaking (Private Sector)

Grantmaking Outcomes (Private Sector)
Community building, building social capital,…

55.0%

2.0%
8.0%

35.0%

Policy or systemic change

50.0%

Civic engagement

47.0%

38.0%

Leadership development

47.0%

34.0%

Education about a civic or social issue

46.0%
45.0%

29.0%
36.0%

16.0% 9.0%
13.0% 6.0%

40.0%

10.0% 11.0%

Awareness, visibility for an issue

25.0%

18.0%

7.0%

8.0% 7.0%
13.0%

6.0%

Problem solving, improved conditions, conflict…

39.0%

Community development (neighborhood,…

38.0%

36.0%

16.0%

10.0%

Dialogue and deliberation

38.0%

38.0%

17.0%

7.0%

Youth development, youth organizing

35.0%

36.0%

16.0%

Community organizing, advocacy, mobilizing

34.0%
29.0%

35.0%
47.0%

21.0%
10.0%
16.0% 8.0%

Community pride, identity
Community assessment, planning, visioning

23.0%

Fundraising for a cause
Very important

12.0%

44.0%

16.0%

Somewhat important

21.0%

41.0%

Not very important

Not important at all

Out of 100 Respondents

Figure 10 Importance of Civic and Social Outcomes in Overall Grantmaking (Public Sector)

Grantmaking Outcomes (Public Sector)
Community building, building social capital,…

67.4%

Community development (neighborhood,…

66.3%

Community pride, identity

26.5%

62.2%

Youth development, youth organizing

28.6%

55.1%

Civic engagement

46.5%

Awareness, visibility for an issue

45.9%

1.0%
6.1%
1.0%
6.1%

25.5%

9.2%

31.6%

10.2% 3.1%

43.4%

7.1%1.0%

33.7%

13.3% 7.1%

Leadership development

35.7%

45.9%

14.3% 4.1%

Dialogue and deliberation

34.7%

43.9%

16.3%

Community organizing, advocacy, mobilizing

33.7%

45.9%

13.3% 7.1%

Education about a civic or social issue

33.3%

38.4%

Community assessment, planning, visioning

30.6%

46.9%

Policy or systemic change

28.6%

Problem solving, improved conditions,…
Fundraising for a cause
Very important
Out of 99 Respondents

Page | 36

36.7%

27.6%
16.5%

Somewhat important

19.2%

32.7%
25.8%
Not very important

25.8%

16.3%

5.1%

9.1%
6.1%

24.5%

10.2%

30.6%

9.2%

32.0%

Not important at all

31.0%

13.0%

12.0%

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
After this common response, private and public funders diverge on what they characterize as“very important.”
In the public sector, local and state arts agencies’ interests prominently relate to community
development outcomes. Community development was further described in the survey to include“neighborhood development, economic development, placemaking.” Two-thirds of public sector
funders rated “community development” (66.3 percent) and “community pride and identity” (62.2
percent) as very important, followed by “youth development” (55.1 percent). These responses are
not surprising, reflecting longstanding concerns of local and state arts agencies: to integrate arts
into economic and neighborhood development, physical improvements through public art
programs, programs affecting youth and disadvantaged populations, and cultural access, identity,and expression. In contrast, only 38 percent of private grantmakers indicated that community
development outcomes were “very important.”
Among other outcomes, more private-sector respondents than public sector respondents areconcerned with policy-level change. Half of private funders (50 percent) responded that “policy orsystemic change” is very important, compared with 28.6 percent of public funders. The large
number of social justice grantmakers among private-sector respondents that support community
organizing, movement building, and specific advocacy accounts for this to some degree. Private
and community foundations rated policy change higher than did family foundations. (Forindividual graphs of private, family, and community foundations’ responses to important social
outcomes, see Statistical Report, Figure I.)
Private funders put somewhat greater emphasis on “problem solving, improved conditions, andconflict resolution” than did public sector funders. Thirty-nine percent of private funders rated this“very important” giving it the fifth highest “very important” response out of 14 outcomes; among
public sector funders, 27.6 percent rated it “very important” or 13th out of 14 outcomes). It
follows, in general, that private funders also value “civic engagement” and “leadershipdevelopment” (47 percent of respondents rated each outcome “very important”), along with“increasing education and visibility for issues” as intermediate capacity-building outcomes thatcan contribute long term to policy or systems change. Thirty-four percent rated “community
organizing, advocacy, and mobilizing” as “very important” and 35 percent rated these outcomes“somewhat important.”

In Which Issue Areas Are Arts and Cultural Strategies Being Supported?
Education and arts and cultural policy were the highest priority areas for both private- andpublic-sector funders. Among both private- and public-sector funders, “education” received themost responses (55.8 percent for private sector, 66.7 percent for public). “Arts and cultural policy”
had the second highest response rate (53.3 percent private, 64.7 percent public). (See Figures 11
and 12.) The high public-sector response rate likely correlates to arts education as a core support
area for many local and state arts agencies. Some private funders may have responded this way toreflect broader education reform work supported by their foundations. In the private sector,
education is a critical concern. As reported in the Social Justice Grantmaking II report, “education
reform and access” ranked high (fourth out of 14 issue areas) and ranked second out of 15 issue
Page | 37

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Artspriorities in More Giving Together: The Growth and Impact of Giving Circles and Shared Giving.
Interviews and analysis of survey comments help to further explain the heavy response in“education” and “arts and cultural policy.”
Education: Many grantmakers assert that working for equitable education and arts education
access are inherently social change or justice issues. Frank Baiocchi, a program officer at the Polk
Bros. Foundation, emphasized that an educated citizenry is more likely to become engaged and to
take a view of the broader good; in short, he said, “education is part of *what creates+ socialchange.” He also observes that strengthening arts access and education in schools “helps build
community within schools,” which can be particularly critical in distressed urban environments
where violence is a factor and schools serve as safe havens and community spaces. Katharine Gin
manages the Nelson Fund, a donor-advised fund of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation that
supports arts training and programs for youth at risk. She underscored the social benefits of arts
training, saying, “Kids we serve have dangerous lives. Anything that is an articulation andtransformation of their lives is about social change.”
Arts and cultural policy: Many view cultural concerns as civic or social concerns in their own right.
Fundamental principles of cultural democracy—the rights of cultures and peoples to define,sustain and perpetuate their own cultures—motivate some giving. Many public- and privatesector funders support arts and culture within under-resourced populations and for cultures
historically denied those expressions, such as Native Americans, people of color, people withdisabilities, and those who are economically disadvantaged. The Joyce Foundation, a place-based
funder in Chicago, is working to bring cultural equity in funding to small and mid-sized culturally
specific arts organizations to expand culturally diverse offerings throughout the Great Lakes
region. Cultural preservation motivates others, i.e. ensuring the longevity of heritage sites and thetransfer of artistic skill within ethnic communities. The Durfee Foundation described just how
critical it was to support a new immigrant Cambodian community in recreating its dance
ensemble. The troupe served a key role in building and sustaining this displaced community, whichwas “more important to them at the time than housing.”“Enabling creativity and expression among those who are restricted by stereotypes or notoften supported is a form of social justice. Support of cultural continuity is an act of social
justice.”
Ken Wilson, The Christensen Fund
Public policy support of the arts is a predominant issue of concern among many arts funders. The
focus is on increasing access to the arts, educating about the arts, ensuring diversity in theorganizations’ personnel and programs, and helping arts organizations and artists to survive andthrive. Issues such as affordable health insurance for artists and resource recovery after natural
disasters represent important arenas for cultural policy and action for some funders. In addition,
many funders and intermediaries work toward policy and infrastructure changes needed within
the system of arts support, such as paying artists and teaching artists fairly and valuing andresourcing community arts on par with professional arts practice.

Page | 38

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
Grantmakers that are supporting media policy define this as a cultural policy issue. Media justiceand media democracy are a significant social justice concern of, and are supported by, somegrantmakers. The Media Democracy Fund based at the Proteus Fund summarizes this position
well. “Now more than ever, artists and cultural organizations are affected by the policies thatgovern all forms of digital distribution and creation. Issues include copyright and intellectual
property, censorship, access to radio, TV and Internet, and digital platforms for producing workand collaborating with others. The digital age presents a multitude of challenges and opportunities
for all disciplines as well as cultural preservation.”
Private- and public-sector funders share three other top issue areas of concern:
Race/ethnicity (41.6 percent private, 46.5 percent public)
Civic participation/engagement (42.9 percent private, 41.4 percent public)
Economic development/justice (32.5 percent private, 41.4 percent public)
Figure 11 Issue Areas Funded (Private Sector)

Page | 39

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
Figure 12 Issue Areas Funded (Public Sector)

Women and girls: Issues related to women and girls are supported through arts and culture
strategies by roughly a third of both private (31.2 percent) and public funders (34.3 percent).
Women’s Funds show some leadership in incorporating arts and culture strategies. Generally,
however, interviewees observe that the arts are not a widely recognized strategy for change or
discussion point within the Women’s Funding Network. The Kentucky Foundation for Women,
notable by virtue of its 25 years of mission-driven work, centers on arts and culture “to promote
positive social change by supporting varied feminist expression in the arts.” Others are coming tosuch work through specific programs or occasional grants. The Women’s Foundation of
Minnesota’s girlsBEST provides grants that support initiatives focused on increasing girls’
readiness to achieve economic well-being through girl-led, girl-driven arts programs. The Valentine
Foundation uses general grantmaking to help achieve social change for women and girls andoccasionally supports cultural organizations and projects that meet the purpose of the foundation.
Other foundations supporting women’s issues through arts and culture include the Leeway
Foundation, The Astraea Lesbian Foundation for Justice, WomenArts, and the Agnes Gund
Foundation.
LGBT: Lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender rights and issues are also being addressed through artsand culture by almost a third of private (31.2 percent) and public (31.3 percent) grantmakers.
Several private foundations help build visibility and opportunities for women and lesbian artists.
The Leeway Foundation supports women and transgender artists who are creating social change,
providing both small project grants and annual $15,000 Transformation Awards to honor artists
Page | 40

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
and cultural workers who have demonstrated a commitment to creating art for social change forfive years or more. The Astraea Lesbian Foundation for Justice, through its U.S. Panel Grants,
supports lesbian, trans and LGBTI social change organizations and projects—including
artistic/cultural and film/video projects—that directly address the depth and complexity of criticalissues in LGBTI communities. WomenArts based in San Francisco, working with the support of anindividual donor, supports women artists of color and lesbian artists. WomenArts also works toincrease support of women artists by organizing an annual Support Women Artists Now (SWAN)
Day. Many artists use SWAN Day events as a fundraising opportunity for their own work or thework of others in their communities.
Environment: About a quarter of private (24.7 percent) and public (25.3 percent) funders aresupporting arts and culture strategies around issues of the environment and environmental justice.
The Compton Foundation, in particular, has been quietly exploring the role of the arts related toenvironmental issues, one of three primary issue areas.
The Compton Foundation has supported The Confluence Project through its Environment andSustainability Program. Initiated in 2000 through the collaboration of a group of PacificNorthwest Native American tribes and civic groups from Washington and Oregon, theConfluence Project was envisioned to evoke the history of the Lewis and Clark Expedition,highlight the tremendous changes it brought to the Pacific Northwest, and encourage action tocreate a future that preserves and protects the area’s natural and cultural resources. Whencomplete, the project will have transformed seven places along the historic Columbia River
Basin with significant landscape restoration and environmental enhancements, all of which
complement permanent art installations by world-renowned artist Maya Lin.
The Seventh Generation Fund’s Environmental Health and Justice program considers “traditional
ethics, cultural practices, and creative applications” in an integrated way when supporting
grassroots actions for protecting and restoring ecosystems and reinforcing traditional stewardshiprelationships to the land. Core to its mission, the Environmental Media Fund, Inc., a nonprofit,
promotes public awareness of, education about, and participation in environmental issues
through film, video, digital, and interactive media; media-based educational teaching tools; andspecial events. The only organization of its kind, EMF works to create collaborative and leveraged
funding and project models. It provides professional project oversight and portfolio managementfor donors and social venture philanthropy investors in documentary, video, and digital media
about important environmental, health, and social justice issues.
Immigration: Although immigration was not among the top survey responses (32 percent private
sector, 17.2 percent public sector), other evidence points to this as an important and growinginterest area. Grantmakers Concerned with Immigrants and Refugees (GCIR), an affinity group of
the Council on Foundations, has commissioned studies that have looked at the role of arts andculture in newcomer experience. GCIR's toolkit, Investing in Our Communities: Strategies for
Immigrant Integration, includes recognition of social and cultural integration as one of six key

Page | 41

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
strategies for supporting immigrant
integration.11 A study conducted in 2010
by Opportunity Agenda with support
from Unbound Philanthropy maps
promising uses of arts, culture, and new
media to promote the inclusion,
integration, and human rights ofimmigrants in the United States.12
Opportunity Agenda is working todevelop an “infrastructure” ofrelationships, information, innovative
practices, and funding opportunities thatcan build support for immigrant
integration and human rights througharts, culture, and media. In addition,
there is new research from the Social
Impact of the Arts Project exploring therole of the arts and culture as a bridgefor new immigrants to engage more insociety. Both reports provide fresh
information to help funders understandthe range of this work.

General Grantmaking, Program
Funding, Intermediaries
Support of arts for change work ishappening largely through general
grantmaking. Few funders havededicated program areas and/or
portfolios specific to arts for change.
More than half (52 percent) of all
respondents indicated they aresupporting arts for change work throughgeneral grantmaking, i.e. grants notmade through dedicated program areasor specific departments. The majority of

Giving Trends in Relevant Issue Areas Reported inSocial Justice Grantmaking II
Social Justice Grantmaking II reported the following
trends in these select issue areas of common concern
to grantmakers supporting arts for change:
Arts and culture: Social justice funders more thandoubled the amount of funding ($26.7 million) toarts, culture, and media, including efforts toincrease the participation of underserved andminority populations. Arts-related social justicegiving increased between 2002 and 2006 from 1
percent to 1.6 percent of total grant dollars. Funding
from the Wallace Foundation constituted 23.1
percent of funds granted (including a single $8
million grant to an arts education initiative) and
Ford Foundation grantmaking constituted 16.1
percent (including a $1.1 million grant to the New
York City-based International Coalition of Historic
Site Museums of Conscience).
Education reform and access: Funding by social
justice funders declined by 6.2% percent between
2002 and 2006. Efforts to reform and provide accessto education received 7.6 percent of social justicefunding in 2006. However, the number of grants
increased by one-third, suggesting that there
continues to be strong interest among social justicefunders in this area but fewer very large grants.
Race/ethnicity: Funding by social justice funders toincrease understanding and collaboration among
racial, ethnic, religious, and other groups was downin 2006 compared to 2004.
Civic participation/engagement: There was aboveaverage growth in civic engagement funding (up 47
percent) between its 2002 and 2006 data gathering.
However, civic engagement funding represented
only 3.6 percent of the social justice funds awarded.
Economic development/justice: Social justicefunders more than doubled their giving in economic
and community development between 2002 and
2006.

11

Other GCIR reports include: “Brave New World: Nurturing the Arts in New Immigrant and Refugee Communities” by
Carolyn Bye (2004) in which the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council (St. Paul, MN) addresses four assumptions thathave threatened to derail grantmaking efforts in new immigrant and refugee communities and offers strategies forfunding immigrant and refugee artists and communities; and The Art of Community: Creativity at the Crossroads of
Immigrant Cultures and Social Services, written in collaboration with The Institute for Cultural Partnerships, 2006.
12

Manne, Liz and Ruthie Ackerman. “Immigration: Arts, Culture and Media 2010: A Creative Change Report.” New
York: Opportunity Agenda, August 2010.

Page | 42

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
respondents from private foundations, family foundations, local arts agencies, and nonprofit
grantmakers reported this as the main way they distribute funds. Small foundations commented
that they simply do not have specialized grant programs or staff given their size. The high level ofgeneral grantmaking may also suggest that supporting arts for change is not yet an explicit focus
for many funders.
Funds are being granted through program or department areas within funding agencies but not
as extensively as through general grantmaking. Eighteen percent of respondents are supporting
arts for change through multiple or discreet program areas or departments; 14 percent are
funding through one program area. Large foundations and community foundations, notsurprisingly, are more often working in this way. Survey data may be conservative given that not
all funders supporting arts for change reported on their funding programs. In addition, those that
did report may not have represented all departmental support for this work within the funding
agency. For example, the Ford Foundation, whose mission includes social change, reported that inMedia and Arts program areas there are four explicit initiatives supporting arts as a change
strategy. However, they also reported that among the foundation’s 35 initiatives, “depending on
the program officer, many others are putting some resources into this strategy.”
Figure 13 How Arts for Change is Supported

Page | 43

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
Intermediaries are serving various purposes to manage and extend resources for this field ofwork.13 The Quixote Foundation, a small family foundation, funnels some of its resources tointermediaries that support social change media so that it might leverage its own modest
resources for greater impact. Nonprofit organizations such as the National Performance Network(NPN) and Creative Capital enable grants to individual artists, extending support from otherfunders that are legally prohibited from supporting individuals or to alleviate the administrative
demands of funding individuals. These intermediaries have generally secured their resources fromarts funders. Regionally based organizations such as Alternate ROOTS ensure that resources canbe directed with place-specific intentions. NPN has had some success with social justice funders in
Hurricane Katrina’s aftermath, but along with Alternate ROOTS has found it difficult to gain theirattention or support.

Types of Grant Support
Project or Program Support: Project support is the most common way that arts for change work iscurrently supported. Of the 119 programs for which funders supplied information, project grants
prevail but general operating grants or some combination of the two also support the work.
About a third of the programs reported offer planning grants as well as project and/or operating
support.14
General Operating Support: Funders are supporting arts for change work through general
operating support with differing intents. Some are “buying into the vision of the organization”
whose work is centered around arts for change. General operating support enables those groups
to advance this mission based on a strong commitment and track record of activity. The Nathan
Cummings and California Community Foundations are examples. Others, like the Akonadi (seesidebar) and Joyce Foundations, view certain cultural organizations as critical parts of a cultural
ecosystem whose mix of programs and position within a particular community contribute
substantially to civic and social vitality. As a grantmaking strategy, these funders on the wholeview organizational support as an investment in building the capacity of the organization to fulfill
its social change goals and potential. Finally, some funders observe that organizations they
support with general funds may occasionally implement arts for change projects but this is not the
grantmaker’s nor the grantee’s primary area of interest.

13

A 2006 working paper prepared by Caron Atlas and Helen Brunner for a private foundation described these among
other roles and relationships that intermediaries play. Intermediaries may be created by funders for specific purposesor supported for the work they are already doing. Intermediaries may be sought to regrant money but can also
provide policy, capacity, knowledge, and strategy expertise. They may also play a role to convene, train, provide
information, advocate, broker relationships, catalyze change, and augment scale and scope. While the common
image of an intermediary is of an entity whose function places it between two other organizations, there are manyother approaches as well, including networks that create webs of relationships. Intermediaries can be organizations,networks, or individuals.
14
The online Funders Directory that supplements this report offers a listing of funders with arts for change funding
programs as well as specific information about those funding where grantmakers supplied this information.

Page | 44

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

The Akonadi Foundation: Operating Support for Culture Advances Social Justice Goals
The Akonadi Foundation’s support of arts within its racial- justice frame started with small
grants to arts projects or events. Compared to larger investments going to social justiceorganizations and programs, staff noted the inequity between arts-focused grants and social
justice grants. Board conversations led to a strategy that now seeks to support more integrationof arts and culture into social justice. One example is Akonadi’s general operating support to
the East Side Arts Alliance. Whereas this community arts agency was funded early on only for
its annual jazz festival, Akonadi now funds it as “an anchor organization” through multi-year
grants. Akonadi’s Melanie Cervantes explains how its cultural and community roles intersect.
“*East Side+ is a place where art practice is grounded in the community. It’s staffed bycommunity-based artists and has a whole network of established artists on their Advisory Board
whose are intersects with their politics. Through art and as a community space, people talkabout several issues such as racial profiling and racism.”
The Akonadi Foundation believes that if cultural work is a strategy, and you want to move thedial on social goals, one-time or even repeated project grants are not as effective as sustainedorganizational support. Cervantes says that, “If a key arts organization is a weak part of theecosystem, then you have to address that.” The foundation’s support of East Side went from
$15,000 in project support to $130,000 in general operating support for two years. In addition,
the foundation has committed to deepening its own understanding of how cultural centersmake a difference in political change. It has formed an internal reading group that gathers anddiscusses structural racism and has read theoretical writing about the role of culturalorganizations and arts-based work in the context of movement building and meets with other
donors and institutional funders for exchange of ideas.
Discretionary and Special Funds: Trustees and/or staff may support arts for change work throughdiscretionary or special funds that allow flexibility. The Quixote Foundation actively uses a
discretionary fund that enables staff and board to suggest prospective grantees and as a way tointroduce arts for change more broadly into the Foundation’s mix of support. The Compton
Foundation, which is oriented primarily toward peace, reproductive justice, and environmental
sustainability, has a formal Family Advisory Board that was initially designed as a “training ground”
for family members who would eventually become members of the board proper. Because there
are artists among the family members, the Family Advisory Board first explored the role of arts inrelation to the social-change mission of the foundation. Compton indicates that the discretionary
opportunity has generated significant full-board dialogue about the role of arts in funding and thefoundation has incorporated arts language into its broader guidelines, albeit “quietly,” in order tocontinue to experiment in this area.
Many funders comment that the siloed nature of funding agencies makes it difficult forinterdisciplinary or cross-sector work such as arts for change to find a home. “Special funds”
sometimes enable support where there seems no other place within a funding agency to support
the work.

Page | 45

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
“My experience is that when a letter of inquiry doesn’t fit into our guidelines, if it’scompelling and closely related to what we do, we manage to find a way to support it.”Michelle Boone, The Joyce Foundation
Fellowships: A few respondents reported fellowship funding that, while not exclusive to arts forchange, may support individuals who are working at this intersection. With aesthetics as a primary
criterion, fellowship funders adhere to a philosophy that supports artists with compelling visions
and work. They tend to follow the lead of the artists rather than prescribe what kind of work will
be supported. Thus, if qualified artists request support for work that addresses social issues,
implicitly or explicitly, it could be supported by fellowships. Two funders of individual artists—the
Jerome Foundation and Creative Capital—have seen some increase in requests from sociallyengaged artists. The Durfee Foundation awards fellowships to individuals who are creatively
addressing place-based problems, enabling them to pursue thinking and action around those
problems. Six individuals receive $75,000 over two years and participate in peer exchanges.
Working across sectors is of significant importance in these awards and arts leaders who work forsocial change have been among the recipients.

What Do Funding
Programs Look Like?
What is actually being
supported by funders at thisintersection of arts andchange? How are funders
structuring and implementing
their grantmaking? The Arts for
Change survey gave
grantmakers the option toprovide information about
specific funding programs that
support arts and culture
strategies for making change.
Appalshop’s Thousand Kites, a community-based performance, web, video,
Ninety different funders
and radio project, responds to the complex social issues created by thegrowth of supermax prisons in central Appalachia. Thousand Kites employs
provided specific program
creative means locally and nationally and over time to provide a voice for
information for 156 programs,
prison reform. © Thousand Kites.
119 of which clearly included
support for arts for change strategies. These formed the basis for the analysis that follows.15
Funder interviews also informed this analysis.

15

Thirty-seven programs did not clearly describe support for an arts for change strategies

Page | 46

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
What is Being Funded
An analysis of purpose and goals of the 119 programs sheds light on how funders think about theirown work in relation to the framing of arts and community, social, or civic change. The focus ofthese programs might be characterized in the major groupings outlined in Figure 14.
Figure 14 Categories of Program Funding in Support of Arts for Change

Social justice or civic engagement
Programs that clearly support in a focused way community, social, or civic change
through arts and culture strategies
Community-based arts infrastructure
Programs enhancing infrastructure that advance community-based arts for change
activity through organizational support, capacity building, knowledge building(such as documentation and dissemination or training programs), or networks
Youth development
Programs whose primary focus is youth development. in a context of social change
or in relation to primary goals of individual transformation
Community development
Programs that support community building, community revitalization,
placemaking, and neighborhood and economic development as an explicit purpose
Culture as issue
Programs that articulate and support culture or arts as a social or civic issue interms of: cultural democracy (the rights of all cultures and peoples to define,sustain, and perpetuate their own cultures); cultural preservation (identity,
traditions, and heritage sites); cultural representation (authentic and selfdetermined representation in such public arenas as tourism); and/or culturalequity (access to funding and other resources that can help cultures thrive)
Disenfranchised or underserved populations
Programs that support opportunities to give voice to and advance social, political,
and/or economic status of disenfranchised populations; programs that aim toensure arts access to specific populations fall under this umbrella

55 programs(46.2%)

15 programs(12.6%)

11 programs(9.2%)

10 programs(8.4%)

10 programs(8.4%)

10 programs(8.4%)

Arts education as issue

7 programs

Programs that support activities that go beyond traditional K-12 in-classroom arts
education or arts education advocacy efforts and connect with community in waysthat advance some defined public good or youth citizenry outcome.

(5.8%)

See the Introduction to the Directory of Funders for examples of funding programs for eachgrouping and consult individual funder pages in the Directory for program information.

Page | 47

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

What are the Barriers to Supporting Arts for Change?
Grantmakers taking the survey were asked to indicate any barriers that pose challenges to theirsupport of arts for change work from among a list of choices. They also had the option ofidentifying others not on the list. Lack of financial resources rose well to the top of both public andprivate funders’ concerns. Other obstacles were cited by significantly fewer respondents, but
came up in interviews. The barriers or challenges (see Figure 15) most often cited among thosealready supporting or planning to support arts for change work were:Lack of funding or resources (35.1 percent private sector, 69.1 percent public sector)
Fiscal crisis (19.9 percent private, 29.4 percent public)
Unclear definitions or context for this work (24.7 percent private, 32.4 percent public,)
Lack of understanding of the role of the arts as a change strategy (22.1 percent private, 25
percent public)
Lack of evidence of the value or impact of the arts as a strategy for achieving social/civic
goals (16.9 percent private, 7.4 percent public)
Figure 15 Challenges to Supporting Arts for Change

Lack of funding or resources: For funders currently supporting arts for change work, grantmakers
in both the public and private sectors responded that a lack of resources was their biggest
challenge in providing support. Public-sector funders (who may receive funds from national, state,
and/or local government) reported this challenge at a significantly higher rate (69.1 percent) thanthose in the private sector (35.1 percent). The economic downturn almost certainly accounts forPage | 48

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
public-sector responses, as 29.4 percent of public-sector funders also noted that “fiscal crisis” wasa barrier. Interestingly, lack of funding rarely came up in interviews. One might infer that lack offunding is not preventing support but rather curtailing the amount that can be distributed insupport of arts for change work.
Unclear definitions or context for this work: Grantmakers are wrestling with the labels attached
to arts for change work and what these labels mean. The challenge of unclear language anddefinitions surfaced often in interviews across all funder types. There are several language-related
issues:The meaning of “social change” or “social justice” is unclear. Some funders are simply unsure
what constitutes social change and whether the work they support fits in that realm. Others
may supporti such work but because their grantees do not use “arts for social change”
language, funders do not recognize or label it as such.
Some funders respond more readily to the language of “community development, community
building, civic engagement” than social justice or social change. These concepts and language
more closely reflect their intents.
The political connotations of the language of social change and social justice present a barrierfor some funders. Some are concerned that their support of certain work could be perceived as
taking a position or advocating in regard to controversial issues. Public funding agencies
showed particular sensitivity to the perception of their public dollars supporting a particularpolitical position or advocacy effort. To some grantmakers, the terms themselves suggest an
oppositional rather than conciliatory mode of change making that does not match fundervalues. Still others find the labels somewhat dated. “Language may need to be reinvented,”remarked Ruby Lerner of Creative Capital. “A lot of artists don’t identify with the way wetalked about this work in 1970.”
At the same time, some funders who are concerned with movement building, policy change,
and the ultimate goal of equity believe the term “social justice” most accurately reflects theirintentions. Grantmakers who are intentional in their use of the term “social justice” mayquestion whether the wide range of support reported in this survey is all really directed atsocial change.
“I’m not an advocate for a single language. Finding the right language allows funders toorganize and claim what they are doing, but they are reluctant to ascribe to any one
framework of language and definitions.”
Claudine Brown, formerly with the Nathan Cummings Foundation
As a matter of philanthropic practice, grantmakers endeavor to understand the ways that fellow
funders and the field use language and assign terms in order to evolve the language that works forindividual grantmakers. Most funders interviewed appreciated the range of frames—community
development, civic engagement, cultural democracy, cultural activism, social justice, etc.—asreflecting different kinds of social and civic outcomes they wish to advance, but they also want toPage | 49

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Artsclarify and to distinguish between them. The fact that this barrier is so high on many grantmakers’
lists suggests that a common language with clearer distinctions is desirable. As one private
foundation program officer observed, lack of a common understanding and use of language“makes it hard to see the critical mass and also to collaborate more.”
Lack of understanding of the role of the arts as a change strategy: About one-fifth of those who
fund arts for change said that “lack of understanding of the role of arts/culture as a strategy forachieving social/civic goals” can be a challenge. Interviews substantially amplified this point andunderscored the need for education at both board and staff levels.
“Social justice funders often don’t see the arts as equal. They don’t understand the value ofartists in problem solving around community issues.”
Nonprofit arts for change funder“It’s a struggle to get arts donors to care about social change.”
Community foundation program officer
Within social justice grantmaking organizations, board or staff members may have little or no arts
experience or knowledge. They struggle to understand exactly how arts and culture integrate with
community organizing strategies or long-term social change efforts. One small family foundationthat is anchored in social justice is moving toward more arts linkages, but the process has been
deliberately incremental. Staff members with knowledge of the arts have moved the board mosteasily first toward supporting media arts as a communications vehicle related to policy interests.
Otherwise the foundation has made only sporadic arts for change grants based on staff and board
discretionary funds. The executive director explains, “The biggest need is education of board andstaff about the role of arts toward policy level change. Within a key issue area like reproductive
rights, how can arts intersect? We want to see integration; a knowledgeable partnership of arts
and advocacy/organizing, not one predominating.”
Another grantmaker who is focused on environmental issues and has funded some projects
utilizing arts strategies admitted that lack of knowledge regarding the artists doing this work has
limited its support to only well-known artists because they do not want to take risks on unknown
artists or artistic practice.
“Í think the issue is somewhat generational. As staff, I support this kind of work but ourtrustees are somewhat older and lean more toward an art for art’s sake viewpoint.”
Family foundation director“Often the internal conversation about this work only happens because a proposal doesn’tneatly fit into the arts program or a civic engagement or social justice program.”
Family foundation director

Page | 50

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
Lack of evidence of the value or impact of the arts as a strategy for achieving social/civic goals:
Another barrier to funding arts for change work rests with staff or trustees who have yet to beconvinced that the arts bring value or contribute significantly to social or civic outcomes (16.9
percent private sector, 7.4 percent public sector). Survey and interview comments underscoredthe influence of this factor.
Multiple funders noted that funding arts for change work is hindered by a lack of rigorous but
accessible documentation, metrics for impact, and effective case-making materials from the field.
Arts funders feel the need for such evidence, particularly when vying for public funds against othersectors. One local arts agency leader commented that “adequate and statistically reliable evidenceof the impact of the arts on change is needed in order to advocate for deployment and integrationof the arts” to address the city’s social and civic issues.
Social justice funders whose core concern is social change are no less challenged.16 Although manyof them have a more realistic view of what change can be expected, they are nonethelessconfronted with the realities of pressing issues that demand strategic support. And to support thearts as a strategy, many need more credible evidence of the arts’ contribution to change.
“Since we started making grants, we have always considered arts and culture as effective
strategies for social change. When we talk to some of our funders and colleagues who areentrenched in the current same-sex marriage fight in the U.S., we realize we need more
tools and data to show evidence of the results of funding arts and culture as criticalstrategies for sustaining change compared to, say, the direct and immediately visible
outcome of a policy change.”
Mai Kiang, Astraea Lesbian Foundation for Justice
Most funders require some form of evaluation, but they do so with varying degrees of attention
and seriousness. (See Figure 16.) Arts funders have generally been more focused on program
evaluation and less focused on hard social impact. Arts grantees are often effective at capturing“anecdotal ripple effects,” but have not necessarily learned to collect, interpret, and reportqualitative information as credible evidence. Many funders are being asked by trustees and theirown donors to complement compelling stories with substantiating empirical evidence. A
community foundation arts program officer remarked, “I know we have enough to tell the stories,
but I don’t know how to prove impact to satisfy trustees and my own planning needs.”

16

The Social Justice Grantmaking II study reported that social justice funders are re-assessing the role of evaluation.
This study and Animating Democracy’s Arts & Civic Impact Initiative both found a need for more realistic expectations
about impact that may result—i.e. that real change takes sustained focus and is influenced by multiple factors—aswell as what it takes to measure it.

Page | 51

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
Figure 16 Grantee Assessment Requirements

Multiple private foundations observed the need to shift or develop their own expectations andapproaches to understanding social change. Many grantmakers recognize that they, along withpractitioners, often assign unrealistic expectations for change based on ideal or naïve visions ofwhat change can be influenced, especially at the grantee project level. One arts grantmakerchallenged both funders and practitioners to be more realistic in defining desired outcomes andmore rigorous in assessing whether change is actually occurring as a result of the art activity.17
The Kentucky Foundation for Women (KFW) focuses on individual feminist artists working inthe state, and the staff is now testing new ways to talk to applicants about the impact of theirart. The foundation’s Executive Director Judi Jennings elaborates: “Using such resources as
Animating Democracy’s Impact website, staff are asking applicants to think harder about whatkinds of social change they want to accomplish through their art and how they will know theirart has made a difference.” KFW staff recognizes that small-scale change may be a more
appropriate goal than national-scale “tipping point” change for an individual community-based
artist. Through these kinds of face-to-face conversations, KFW is seeking to learn from theartists how to develop more realistic expectations and concrete understanding about art andsocial change.
Grantmakers are aware of the limited evaluation capacity of grantees but often still place
unrealistic expectations on them. As yet, even though funders generally recognize the investmentof time and resources needed to meet some of their own evaluation requirements, the majority(54 percent private, 63 percent public) “never” provide additional funds to support evaluation
costs.
Finally, some interviewees commented on the lack of a coordinated, methodical effort among
funders and partners to look at change that would support comparative analysis. In this vein,
Women’s Funds have found useful a set of five indicators of social change developed by the17

Analysis of expectations such as these are further explored in “Shifting Expectations: An Urban Planner’s Reflections
on Evaluation of Community-based Arts,” by Maria Rosario Jackson, Ph.D. of the Urban Institute, commissioned by
Animating Democracy’s Arts & Civic Engagement Impact Initiative, 2009.

Page | 52

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
Women’s Funding Network as a way to more consistently understand effects of arts for change
work.18
Respondents commented in the “Other” category and in interviews about these additional
barriers:
Concern about diminished emphasis on artistic interests and quality: Many arts grantmakers are
philosophically centered on the intrinsic value of art. They endeavor to support grantees’ artistic
explorations without prescribing social and/or civic outcomes, though these investigations may
result in social and/or civic outcomes. This is particularly true for those supporting individual
artists directly. Social change work is not explicitly encouraged or sought in grant guidelines
although it may very well be funded when it comes over the transom.
“The Foundation’s strategy is to support the creative artist at the center and let the focusof the work be artist-driven. We fund the arts exclusively with the belief that emerging
artists contribute to the creation of a dynamic and evolving culture.”
Eleanor Savage, Jerome Foundation
Arts funders called attention to the tensions around a persistent question that inhibits funding ofarts for change work: Is artistic quality somehow diminished when art takes on social or civic
intention? Viewpoints differ about whether artistic excellence and social/civic efficacy arenecessarily mutually exclusive. Interviewees mentioned exemplars such as artists Mel Chin, DannyHoch, Cornerstone Theater Company, and Urban Bush Women, whose work and field discourse
are breaking down these barriers of understanding. Those who have worked in and funded
community-based arts often assert that “there is a different philosophical underpinning thatneeds to be grappled with.” They observe that sometimes concern about artistic excellence isused as a rationale for not funding arts with explicit social intention (or community art or culturally
specific arts). These field conversations could benefit from a better understanding about theinterrelatedness of aesthetic and social dimensions, the theory of change that guides art forchange work, and the social and civic effects of arts.
“We look at the work’s effect externally and how the work is reaching people, more thanmaking artistic quality the sole criterion.”
Michelle Boone, Joyce Foundation

18

The Boston Youth Arts Evaluation Project, funded by the Barr Foundation is a noteworthy comparative evaluation
effort. It brings national leaders together in collaboration with four youth arts nonprofit organizations to research,
design, implement, and share innovative evaluation methods and tools to measure primarily youth development
outcomes and progress.

Page | 53

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
Difficulty establishing crossdepartmental /crossprogram coordination within
the grantmaking agency:
Within foundations, arts
departments and social
justice or civic engagement
are often separate. Structuraldivisions and processes canmake cross-fertilization,
cross-learning, andcollaboration difficult, if not
impossible. Arts program
officers within foundations
that fund other sectors cansometimes expand resources
A scene from Los Illegals, a play created in collaboration withstrategically for arts-based
undocumented workers as part of Cornerstone Theater Company’s Justice
Cycle project in Los Angeles. Partnering with the National Day Laborersocial change work throughOrganizing Network, the Justice Cycle generated Teatro Jornalero Sininterdepartmental
Fronteras, a traveling theater troupe made up entirely of day laborers
collaboration. But this iswhich has performed at job centers and work sites all over greater Los
sometimes met withAngeles for more than 3,000 fellow day laborers. Photo by John Luker.
resistance when there arecompeting priorities. Even within arts funding organizations, some observe that the various arts
strands are often kept separate, defeating a holistic approach. In large foundations, individual staff
may understand the importance of supporting arts for social justice, but it may be a piecemeal
effort at best. One community foundation reported that her organization’s culture of collaboration
has successfully enabled collaboration between the arts and other departments, all of which sharean agency-wide focus on civic engagement. However, this is the exception rather than the rule.
Outside the funding agency itself, there is increasing recognition that boundaries must be
dissolved to solve intractable social problems. “We believe that change is inhibited when people
work in silos,” remarked Claire Peeps of the Durfee Foundation. “We see, for example, that
housing is also a public transportation issue. Vertical knowledge in an area is good, but we need to
expand knowledge horizontally.”

Funders Who Are Not Supporting Arts for Change
Forty-five respondents (23.9 percent of all respondents) answered that they do not currently fundarts for change work. (See Figure 17.) Based on the varying interpretations of, or confusion
around, “social justice” and “social change” terms, it must be noted that several respondents who
claimed they do not support arts for change would, in the opinion of these researchers, absolutely
fit in the realm of arts for change supporter.

Page | 54

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
Barriers Preventing Support of Arts for Change WorkFor funders not currently supporting arts for change work, the most significant barriers werelack of funding (44.4 percent), unclear definitions or context for this work (35.6 percent), lack ofmission fit (28.9 percent), and lack of understanding of the role of arts and culture as a strategy
for social change (22.2 percent). Private-sector respondents indicated they are directing limited
resources to sorely needed general operating support for arts organizations and to maintain focus
on artistic goals.
Nearly one-third of respondents indicated that mission fit is a concern and about the same
proportion said that mission would have to change in order to support this work. Many privatesector respondents suggested that it would be a significant and challenging shift to make arts forchange a primary goal or focus. It might be assumed that such funders are unlikely candidates tosupport such work.
Another concern among those that do not support arts for change is the lack of convincing
evidence of the impact of arts as a strategy for achieving social and civic goals. This was cited by
15.6 percent of respondents not currently supporting this work. In the “Other” response category,almost all of the public sector respondents articulated external restrictions and questions ofappropriateness as significant barriers. External pressures included the political connotations ofsupporting arts for social change work and state statutes.
Figure 17 Challenges for Funders Not Supporting Arts for Change Work

Page | 55

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

It is interesting to note that two major foundations responded that they do not support arts forchange, but actually do so through particular dimensions of their grantmaking. The John D. andCatherine T. MacArthur Foundation reported that it no longer supports arts for change work, butinstead responds primarily to the crucial need for general operating support. However,
MacArthur’s Media Grantmaking program continues to support social-issue documentary films
intended for a broad national audience as well as public media and nonprofit programs that assist
in production and dissemination. In addition, the Digital Media and Learning initiative supports avariety of activities to determine how digital media are changing the way young people learn, play,socialize, and participate in civic life. Digital games, in particular, are one area of support where
creativity is a means to achieve these goals.
Similarly, the Pew Charitable Trusts, well known for its focus on civic engagement, responded thatwhile in general it does not see its focus as arts and social change, “Our grant processes do resultin funding for projects that relate to social change, but only if they meet the same artistic quality
criteria as other successful applicants.” The Heritage Philadelphia Program, along with otherdiscipline-specific grantmaking done through the Philadelphia Center for Arts & Heritage fundedby Pew, often makes grants to artists and arts organizations whose work engages around civic andsocial issues.

Factors That Could Drive Support for Those Not Funding Arts for Change
Grantmakers who are not funding arts for change work commonly cited three factors that would
encourage greater support. More than a third (35 percent) would have to change their core
mission or understand how arts for change work aligns with core mission in order to support it.
Additional resources—financial and human—would be needed according to 27.5 percent of the
respondents. A quarter of the grantmakers stated that increased evidence of the need for grantgiving in this field and substantial proof of the impact of arts for change work was necessary forthem to increase their support in this area. One major foundation commented that he would
listen if there was “demand from the majority of our grantees that this type of funding is more
important to them than general operating support,” and this would necessitate a fundamental
shift in grantmaking focus. (See Figure 18.)

Page | 56

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
Figure 18 Factors That Would Drive Support for Arts for Change WorkIn “Other” comments, some grantmakers indicated that trustees’ viewpoints would need tochange. A couple of responses indicated that more trustee education could potentially motivate
support for the work. One organization said that there were no factors that could drive them tosupport this work because they believe that “it’s political and would be perceived as partisan by
our donor community, thereby threatening our Fund’s existence and, potentially, our 501(c) 3status.”Page | 57

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
Artist Mel Chin explores ways that art can
provoke greater social awareness,
responsibility, and action. His interest in socialand ecological concerns has led him tocollaborate with scientists and government
agencies to create work that transcends
traditional sculpture to animate a sense of
possibility, inform the public consciousness,engage people in grassroots activism throughart, and to influence policy makers to act tosolve problems.
Operation Paydirt is an ongoing project thatseeks to motivate responsible action to deal
with high levels of lead contaminated soil in
New Orleans, present even before Hurricane
Katrina, but further compounded after thestorm.

Operation Paydirt manifests in multiple
ways. The Fundred Dollar Bill Projectfocuses on the creation of three million
artworks (personal drawings based on thelikeness of a one hundred dollar bill) by
children across the U.S. A web site forteachers and others brings to national scale
the call to create Fundred dollar bills andfor children to add their voice to acollective call for action. A Safehouse in
New Orleans (a house converted to be a
local repository for Fundred bills) keeps the
project physically visible. When the three
million Fundred dollars are in hand, they
will be collected from every Fundred site
across the country and delivered
ceremoniously to Washington D.C. via
armored truck. A request will be made ofCongress for an even exchange of money
and services toward solving this terrible
toxic problem.

Page | 58

Images from: www.fundred.org

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: TRENDS OR TIPPING POINTSIn the estimation of the authors these survey findings, interviews, and funder reports suggest
some largely positive trends and an expanding field. But are these trends or merely evidence thatarts for change is a current funding fashion? Or do they indicate potential tipping points—
opportunities to drive expanded support for civic engagement and social change through arts andcultural strategies?
A core group of funders with integrated arts and social change missions is emerging. These
grantmakers often focus on advocacy and target issue-specific areas for support. They seethat human rights, equality, and other social justice goals can be advanced through creative
expression and cultural activism.
More arts funders, particularly public agencies (state and local arts agencies), are addressing
community, social, and cultural equity issues in more explicit and focused ways with changes
to grant programs, guidelines, and allocations.
Grantmakers that support individual artists are following the leads of the artists they
support, who are increasingly devising projects with both aesthetic and social dimensions.
Their funding and related support for this work is evolving to better serve these artists’interests.
Private place-based and community foundations are linking arts and culture funding tocommunity, neighborhood development, and civic engagement goals.
A small number of national foundations have stepped up to support field building throughspecial pilots and initiatives, cross-sector exploration, and work, convenings, training, anddocumentation that can lead to stronger infrastructure for arts and social change work.
Next-generation philanthropists and individual donors represent untapped sources of
support.
Federal resources are opening up through new initiatives of the Obama administration andthe leadership of National Endowment for the Arts Chairman Rocco Landesman, who has
been spearheading negotiations with multiple federal agencies to broaden grant guidelines
to invite arts and culture proposals.
More corporate funders are paying attention to socially responsible philanthropy, in
addition to longtime concerns for contributing to the well being of communities where they
do business. Models of corporate support for arts for change efforts are surfacing that canbe elevated to stimulate peers.

Page | 59

Animating Democracy | Americans for the ArtsIMPLICATIONS AND OPPORTUNITIESIn 2008, the Arts & Social Justice Working Group articulated its aspirations: “to grow the cohort offunders, cultural workers, consultants and artists whose work extends our understanding ofdiversity, justice, and equality by increasing the resources devoted to this work; building
coalitions; fostering collaborations; and disseminating research and information that will lead to amore just society.” What does the portrait of arts for change support provided by this study
suggest in terms of opportunities and strategies that would allow the widest range of grantmakers
to progress along these visionary lines? And what avenues beyond conventional private- andpublic-sector philanthropy could expand resources for arts for change work?

Four Strands of Interest in Arts for Change Support
Expanding support for arts for change cannot be done with a broad-brush approach. This study
was intentionally open in defining “arts for change,” embracing change in terms of “civic
engagement, community organizing, social change, social justice, participatory democracy,
community building, and community development.” As the survey and interviews point out, notonly is there is interest along all points of the spectrum, but many grantmakers define theirprograms and areas of interest even more particularly. For example, although values and interests
intersect, not all funders interested in “arts for change” consider access to arts a motivating cause.
Neither do all grantmakers want to talk about human rights and empowerment. While somefunders are comfortable in a conversation about social justice, others would prefer to talk aboutcommunity building. Some want to support art with social dimensions while others want toaddress cultural equity issues within the arts field. What motivates a funder that wants to improveneighborhoods by investing in an arts strategy may not be compelling to a funder interested inchanging the community investment practices that created inequities in neighborhoods across acity.
Acknowledging this wide range of interests, and the particularities within them, four key strands
of interest in arts for change work seem to emerge:
Issue-specific causes, social justice, and cultural activism
Community development, community/civic engagement, community arts
Cultural equity, arts access, arts education
Support for artists
Because these strands each have their own drivers, goals, and measures for success, expanding
participation and increasing the resources committed to arts for change strategies will best be
achieved by implementing strategies tailored for, and directed to, funders in each strand ofinterest.

Strategies for Growing Support
The following strategies—suggested by participants in the study and augmented where noted by
the authors—address opportunities to stimulate grantmaking in both arts funding andPage | 60

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
community/social/civic change sector funding. Strategies can be universally applied but should beconsidered as they relate to different strands of interest. Several recommendations focus onparticular challenges, barriers and opportunities related to increasing arts grantmakers’ support ofarts for change work but, generally, they reach across sectors to build support from and withsocial justice, issue-based, and community-focused grantmakers.
Strategies for increasing support for arts for change
1.
2.
3.
4.

Enhance grantmaker knowledge and practice
Establish cross-cutting collaborations
Cultivate nascent grantmakers and individual donors
Increase visibility for arts for change work and develop evidence of impact

1. Enhance grantmaker knowledge and practice“I feel I have just seen the future and you are all the seers.”
Individual donor’s response after an informal meeting with Creative Capital
grantees to learn about their work
1a. Develop funder education opportunities that can help drive interest, comfort, and readinessamong grantmakers who are not fully open or are just beginning to consider supporting thiswork. This strategy addresses one of the most significant barriers to support identified by thisstudy. Funders pointed to shifts in understanding when unfamiliar staff, trustees, and donors havethe opportunity to witness projects first hand; meet with artists for substantive exchange; andlearn from peers’ experience, field documentation, and analysis. Strategies include:
Convenings like the Creative Change retreats in
Telluride and Santa Fe sponsored by Opportunity
Agenda that engaged community organizers, activists,
artists and arts leaders, and funders in exploratory
conversation, and the 2008 New Orleans meeting cohosted by Air Traffic Control and the Future of Music
that invited funders to connect with musicians working
for change were cited as fostering a “collaborative spirit
where egos were not in play” and where a learning
environment was promoted.
The Skillman Foundation has organized tours of its
community arts grantees as a way for other local andregional funders to learn about the arts-basedneighborhood and youth development work being
done in Detroit and to prompt discussion of
coordinated and strategic funding.

Presentations, sessions, and materials
for education at funder gatherings.
Trustee meetings, gatherings of regional
funders, affinity groups, and annual
conferences offer opportunities toexpand interest in arts for change work.
At these gatherings, discussion of models
of arts and social change projects andanalysis of how they work, and theiroutcomes, would help to advanceunderstanding.

Knowledge-building exchanges between
grantmakers, artists and arts organizers,
and community, civic, and social justice stakeholders for substantive learning. Grantmakers want
opportunities to meet with those who are doing the work on the ground as well as researchers,
evaluators, and others who analyze it, in order to deepen understanding, explore partnership
opportunities, and generally advance field discourse. Interviewees underscored the importance of
creating a context and an environment for “honest” conversation, in which challenges and failures
Page | 61

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
can be examined and where discussions or expectations of funding are off the table. On-sitelearning opportunities during which staff and trustees of funding organizations can observe thework of, and have focused discussion with, grantees and others doing arts for change work
appealed greatly to many interviewees.
Local or regional funding networks whereconversations about arts for change can beelevated and cross-sector opportunity
explored. Interviewees cited both existingregional funding networks—formal andinformal—and new opportunities to createarts and social change-specific networks thatserve the interests of a region.

At meetings of Delaware Valley Grantmakers (DVG),
the Valentine Foundation has encouraged integrated
work on both sides, i.e. promoting the arts to fundersinterested in issues of women and girls as wellencouraging attention to advancing social change
among arts funders. The Los Angeles County Arts
Funders and Southeast Michigan Arts Funders havebuilt presentations about arts for change into theirregular meetings as have informal cohorts of New
York dance funders and New York Blacks in
Philanthropy.

Peer exchange and advising. Some funders
believe that one-to-one and affinity group exchange can “increase confidence and sharpen theoryof change for the work.” One small family foundation program officer reported positively on a
recent invitation to a peer foundation to share its experience funding arts for change work,commenting, “Much stock is put in what can be learned from peers and the influence of peers.”

A Few Models of Grantmaker Education
The Christensen Fund attributes its trustees’ integrative thinking and willingness to take risks to the timeand resources invested to allow them to see firsthand grantees’ activities and learn about issues andopportunities.
The Akonadi Foundation has established a reading group that gives staff and trustees an opportunity toread and discuss racial justice movement building and has read theoretical writings about the role of artsand culture in advancing social change. One topic, for example, was how cultural centers make a differencein political change. Invitations are extended to other donors and institutional leaders to broaden
perspectives. Akonadi’s Melanie Cervantes believes, “Talking to colleagues, sitting together at a table andwrestling with a question, that’s the powerful place of transformation.”
The Donor Circle for the Arts of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation and Hunt Alternatives Fund haveheld special events for donors that mix social and educational intentions, showcasing the work of civicallyengaged artists and cultural organizations.
The Durfee Foundation in Los Angeles takes seriously its role in initiating and supporting cross-sector
convenings that enable practitioners, funders, and leaders in arts and other sectors to learn from one
another. Durfee regularly convenes grantee cohorts and hosts periodic local conferences to bring different
sectors together for learning and to allow synergies to develop. For its Stanton Fellowships and Sabbatical
Program, cohort convenings include people from the arts “as a matter of course,” whether or not they are
grantees—although artists and cultural organizations have often been grantees. At the same time, theseconvenings fuel Durfee’s understanding of possibilities.
Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in Philanthropy, Grantmakers Interested in Immigrants andRefugees, and Funders Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities, have focused attention on
the role of the arts in their work through conference sessions, special funding initiatives, and commissioned
papers.

Page | 62

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
Papers, reports, and case studies. Many funders are unaware of extant materials that canenhance their knowledge about arts for change work. More can be done to make known relevant
papers, reports, and case studies developed by individual funders and funder affinity groups, fieldresearchers, and supporters such as Art and Democracy and Animating Democracy; and keyarchives such as the online Community Arts Network.19
1b. Address specific concerns—whether real or perceived—of arts funders that may increase thelikelihood of their support. With considerable evidence that artists and arts organizations are
motivated to contribute to healthy communities and a healthy democracy, more arts funders
could be moved to recognize and support this important and relevant role for arts and culture.
Among arts funders currently supporting the work, some are effectively operating at sophisticatedlevels to support arts for change while others may lack the intentionality and rigor that could
enhance social or civic outcomes. Funders may have low expectations or requirements. Grantees
may lack adequate knowledge of the social
In 2007/2008, the Los Angeles County Arts
issues and populations central to a project,
Commission received grants from the National
the power dynamics within partnerships, orEndowment for the Arts and the L.A. County Quality
a clear theory of change. Greater rigor in
and Productivity Commission’s Productivity
Investment Fund to implement an 18-month pilot
arts grantmaking and enhanced support
program, Artful Solutions: Pathways fromservices for grantees could improve efforts
Homelessness grant initiative. This initiative was theand results for both.
nation’s first regional effort to include the arts as an
The following strategies could amplify
current arts funders’ support of arts forchange and engage some who havereservations:
For state and local arts agencies, document
and disseminate exemplary supportmodels. Public sector funders would benefit
from funding models in their own sectorsthat advance cultural equity, community
arts partnerships, and impactful civic andcommunity engagement.

important component of support services forhomeless populations and to provide data that canbe used in the future to help solve the challenges ofhomelessness. The Arts Commission awarded fivepilot grants of $18,000 to arts organizations thatpartnered with a housing, shelter, or social service
agency to provide homeless individuals or families
with quality arts programming. The partnership wascentral to the objective of the initiative, to stabilize
the lives of participants and improve their access topermanent housing. An independent evaluatorknowledgeable about homelessness programs andpolicies conducted the evaluations with all five
grantees and developed an aggregate report: Artful
Solutions: Creativity, Self-Worth and the Path from
Homelessness.

Support efforts to advance field discourse about criteria for aesthetic excellence and social
efficacy of arts for change work. What constitutes authentic and excellent work is a persistentconcern as more and more artists and arts organizations work in civic engagement and socialchange and arts funders consider their role in support of this work. Exchange between funders
and practitioners is critical to developing common understanding. Support for the field in
advancing this conversation is equally important.

19

Animating Democracy’s expanded web site developed through its Arts & Social Change Mapping Initiative and Arts
& Civic Engagement Impact Initiative can serve as a central repository for such materials.

Page | 63

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
For public agency funders, develop a brief that identifies and addresses perceived risks related
to supporting arts for change work. Such a brief would address concerns related to the potentiallycontroversial nature of issues taken up in funded projects, perceptions that the agency is taking a
position on an issue, and concerns that supporting creative projects with an advocacy orientation
violates legal restrictions for public agencies.
1c. Undertake future studies of arts for change grantmaking that will provide the neededbaseline for tracking funding patterns. As support for arts for change evolves, study of the field of
supporters will require information that allows benchmarking. A study based on analysis of actual
grantmaking activity would provide a more complete assessment of dollars invested and types ofactivity funded than this study can accomplish. Working through the Foundation Center, with its
access to a body of grant materials for the range of arts and change-oriented funders, would allow
for a more reliable capture of both realms. Collaboration with funders and field leaders would be
crucial to ensuring appropriately framed criteria and definitions in order to collect and analyze
information reflective of the desired range of work. Such a study should be repeated every three
to four years. Combined or separate research would be valuable in better understanding businessand corporate giving interests related to arts for change work.

2. Establish cross-cutting collaborations
Funding leaders can exercise their leadership to promote and influence opportunities within or
across philanthropic segments or around particular issues.
2a. Foster cross-fertilization and collaboration within grantmaking organizations to promote
integrated support of arts for change work. Because the nature of arts for change work requires
collaboration across sectors grantmakers observe that siloed approaches to support will never be
as effective as those that integrate the interests, goals, and knowledge of relevant fields. In orderto define viable opportunities, staff across agency departments will need to gain deeper
understanding of each other’s focal points, priorities, and measures of success, and be open toexperimentation. Ongoing efforts for exchange—both informal and structured—and crossfertilization are key. Cross-cutting support requires not only committed champions at the staff
and/or trustee level, but philosophical as well as operational shifts. Grantmakers will need todefine what form such support will take, e.g. joint funding from different programs ordepartments, collaboratively defined initiatives or funding programs, or a truly integrated
approach across all agency funding. They will also need to determine how to effectively executethe right approach.
2b. Support on-the-ground cross-sector projects and learning opportunities for practitioners,
which will build field capacity and expand field and funder knowledge. Some social change andissue-focused funders described support for the work as the best way to really understand whatworking with and through the arts can mean. To advance cross-sector work on the ground,grantmakers would ideally invest in strong, well-conceived work by leading-edge practitioners andalso allow experimentation, critical analysis, and capacity building for new partners in arts andother sectors. Targeted investments such as the following (identified by study participants and theauthors based on field conversations) could help advance potentially effective cross-sector
Page | 64

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
initiatives to meet social or civic goals, and at the same time inform the field with models for thevarious strands.
Demonstration projects and special initiatives. Demonstration projects allow for examination ofquality practices, challenges, and assessment in terms of change outcomes. They might include
fellowship opportunities for artists to be “in residence” within organizations in other sectors, andvice versa, to promote mutual contributions and intensive learning.
Cross-sector learning opportunities for practitioners in the arts and other relevant fields. Just as
grantmakers would benefit from learning opportunities, so too would practitioners. Cross-sector
training and learning exchanges can build deeper knowledge regarding different ways of working
and suggest when and how arts and culture can most potently contribute to desired outcomes.
They may also generate ideas and motivate partnerships.
Documentation and dissemination of cross-sector models. Practitioners who are unfamiliar with
the nature of arts for change work need concrete examples of what cross-sector work looks like
and what it means for art to be an integrated dimension when organizing campaigns or creating
community development strategies. These examples would illustrate the potential impact of thework on the ground and provide models for effective funding partnerships.
2c. Leverage public funds
from local, state, andfederal (non-arts) agencies.
The National Endowment
for the Arts’ negotiation in2010 with HUD and the U.S.
Dept. of Transportation has
set a strong precedent inmaking arts organizations
eligible as partners withothers for Sustainable
Communities Planning andChallenge Grants. The
authors see an opportunity
for state and local arts
agencies, in particular, to
The Wing Luke Asian Museum has activated Seattle’s Asian Pacific American
connect with education,communities through deep and sustained engagement in its programs andcommunity development activities. As a cultural and civic organization, it has
community development,
exercised and cultivated leadership and economic development for Seattle’s
economic development,
Chinatown-International District community. Photo courtesy of Wing Luketransportation,
Asian Museum.
environment, healthagencies, etc. where arts for change strategies may be applicable. Since these agencies’ guidelines,
qualifications, applications and criteria for review might be substantively different from those ofarts agencies, there would be value in developing orientation, training, and consultation to help
prepare arts applicants to take advantage of such funding opportunities.
Page | 65

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

2d. Facilitate coordinated efforts and identification of peer grantmakers and practitioners
through development of information and resources. Because arts for change funding is in its
nascent stages, information about facilitating grantmaker connection and activity is lacking.
Enthusiasm was high for this report and for companion information about which funders aresupporting the work, and how. One interviewee hoped that this affinity area, like more maturefunding sectors, could begin to get a handle on how various grantmakers focus their investments
in order to guide prospective grantees and coordinate with other funders. She expanded on thisidea: “We don’t yet have a rational capital market in our field. I’d like to be able to say to someone
looking for support, ‘This is where you go for early investment. This is where you go for building
out your project.’”

3. Cultivate nascent grantmakers and individual donors
3a. Nurture participation from next-generation and individual donors. While the study’s findings
speak generally to developing new sources of support among socially oriented grantmakers andarts funders, survey respondents and interviewees identified next-generation and individual
donors as likely supporters because they tend to more readily understand and embrace the powerof arts for change. Younger foundation trustees seek new ways to address social issues. They areopen to new ideas and are more likely to be comfortable with art that has a social dimension.
Social justice and next-generation funder networks like Resource Generation have laid thegroundwork by including artists and arts for change content in their conference programs.
Participation in donor circles and the practice of individual donors in supporting contemporaryarts projects with a social dimension suggest that individual donors could be more engaged tosupport arts for change projects. One interviewee believes donor circles could be cultivated more,suggesting that GIA could help to seed the concept and encourage membership and conference
participation by making them affordable to circle members and individual funders.
3b. Build practitioners’ capacities in utilizing social media and networking opportunities to raisemoney through online contributions. A sweep of online competitions such as the Pepsi RefreshCampaign and the Case Giving Challenge shows both arts and social justice causes participating
and reaping support. Websites like kickstarter.com offer innovative ways for individual artists andother cultural practitioners to fund creative ideas and ambitious endeavors. Several examples ofarts for change were also found. There are pros and cons for each campaign platform and contest
opportunity and much to be learned about how to convert online donors and voters into ongoingsupporters. Further study is needed.
Philanthropic contests and online media have become a source of fundraising for manysmall nonprofits. …almost 80 percent of participants had a donation button on theirwebsite, and nearly half raised money through Network for Good. Eighty percent werealready using Causes on Facebook to raise money prior to the second America’s Giving
Challenge. This is evidence of a shift by nonprofit organizations that now see fundraisingthrough their websites or using Facebook and other online channels as a viable andPage | 66

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010
necessary part of their efforts. …Social media-specific fundraising, while in its infancy, has
become a real part of day-to-day nonprofit online fundraising.
Beth Kantor and Allison Fine
The Giving Challenge 2009: Assessment and Reflection Reportfor the Case Foundation

4. Increase the visibility of arts for change work and develop evidence of its impact
4a. Build capacity for evaluation that can provide evidence of the impact of arts for change
work.20 How to measure the social impact of the arts emerged as a dominant question for funders
in this study. As pressure increases on grantmakers to understand the impact of their investments,
they reflected on the need to consider their own expectations, requirements of grantees, andsupport for evaluation. They need also to consider how they might support and cultivate their
grantees’ evaluative thinking and skills. And to build a credible case for the role of the arts, arts forchange philanthropy will eventually need to consider ways to aggregate data and support
development of field resources that can make the case. A long-term goal is for the social impact of
the arts to be recognized by civic leaders, policy makers, and funders on par with the prevailing
economic and intrinsic arguments for the arts.
4b. Individual funders can play an important role in building evaluation models for arts forchange work through their own initiatives. Investments in documentation and evaluation related
to grant initiatives can help build a body of evidence regarding the social impact of the arts. Whenfunders invest in evaluation and support evaluators and researchers to work with grantees todevise or adapt evaluation models, gains can be manifold. Grantees benefit from opportunities towork with professionals—building skills in planning evaluation and documentation and incollecting, analyzing, and using data. Researchers and evaluators learn about the particularchallenges of assessing the social, civic, and aesthetic impact of the arts as they contribute theirexpertise, ideas, and approaches. Funders obtain credible data. Further, they can define
opportunities to aggregate and compare or contrast information. Dissemination of the resulting
processes and reports can add to field knowledge.
4c. Increase visibility within relevant fields and among a broader public for arts for change work.
The work of arts for change is not widely recognized or understood. At the 2008 National Arts
Policy Roundtable co-sponsored by Americans for the Arts and the Sundance Preserve, high-level
leaders in philanthropy, civic and government spheres, business, and the media concurred that
this work does not receive anywhere near the degree of attention in mainstream media that moremainstream cultural activity does. And although new media sources are more likely to feature it,more can be done to drive audiences to it. To help increase broader public visibility,
20

Animating Democracy’s Arts & Civic Engagement Impact Initiative has laid groundwork for advancing understandingof the social efficacy of arts for change work through: the development of an online resource offering tools andframeworks for assessing social and civic change through the arts; a field lab that offered a model for coachingpractitioners in evaluation approaches and methods suited to their arts for change work; and commissioned papers
and case studies.

Page | 67

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
acknowledgment, and understanding of this work, compelling stories need to be told, both
broadly and to targeted audiences, and in traditional and new ways. The authors recommend:
Media coverage. Maximize opportunities through grantmakers’ own communications offices toleverage national media attention.
Recognition/awards. Develop and support awards that give recognition to those doing,supporting, and funding the work while also serving to inform and motivate relevant fields andpublics.

CONCLUSION
Arts for change philanthropy is an emerging field, but momentum is clearly growing. As with any
emerging field, attention to advancing field capacity is key; the Authors’ Afterword takes up a few
ideas in this regard. This report can serve as a touchstone for discussions within grantmaking
agencies and affinity groups, and across funder types, as they consider new and renewed supportof the arts as a strategy for change. It is the intention that this report and the companion FunderDirectory illuminate arts for social change philanthropy as it evolves in the short term, and that its
findings inform regular study of this field henceforth.

Page | 68

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

AUTHORS’ AFTERWORD
Building Field Capacity
Grantmakers who support arts for change and field leaders who nurture it are eager to develop
synergy and visibility for the work through cooperation and coordination. The authors note that,over the time of this study, questions have surfaced around field and movement building,communication models, and the need for web-based resources. There is also concern about
duplication of efforts. The sense of momentum around this work and a sense of generally sharedvalues belie the fact that “arts for change” is a multidimensional umbrella term encompassing
many strands of work arising from myriad arts, cultural, and social justice traditions.
A January 2010 gathering led by Sarah Ingersoll and Anasa Troutman, hosted by the Open Society
Foundations, brought together an intergenerational group of field leaders from cultural activism,
contemporary and community arts, intermediary and service organizations, curators, organizers,
and grantmakers, many of whom of whom had not met or worked together before. The spirit ofcollaboration and the desire to coordinate are real, but efforts are hampered when organizations
do not know where their next resources will come from and by concern about imposing
infrastructure. While there appears to be general agreement that the solution is not to create a
new organization or structure, it is nonetheless important to build knowledge of one another andform natural collaborations. As well, it will be helpful to gauge the resources available for fieldbuilding and coordination.
Like any emerging field, arts for change will require attention to building a base of support—
inclusive of funding but also of leadership, professional development, communications
infrastructure, and self-reflection. Based on the study as well as cumulative observations of the
field, the authors offer a few additional considerations for grantmakers that could help to build
field capacity.
Develop partnerships between national and regional or local funders to validate local work andleverage new funding. In any locale, it is likely that there are change agents—activists and artists
working individually or with organizations who have little knowledge of one another or of thenational and international communities ofWith support from the Nathan Cummings
practice that exist outside their own
Foundation, the St. Louis Regional Arts
Commission’s celebrated the 13th year ofcommunities. Similarly there may be one or aoperations for CAT, its Community Arts Training
handful of funders that support change work
program, by hosting a Midwestern-based national
and arts for change strategies in particular.
conference on community arts. CAT has developed
a cadre of skilled artists and social service agencies
National funding partners can stimulate local
through a well conceived community arts training
notice and funder interest in local programs.
and project support program focusing on strong
Their support can help bring projects andpartnership work. The conference, supported by anational/local funder partnership, attracted new
programs to scale, stimulate cross-sector
local funding support and cemented a regional
collaborations, engage local officials, andnetwork for community arts that is connected to
the national community arts movement.
connect local and national networks of artsfor change practitioners.
Page | 69

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

Engage intermediaries, service organizations, and networks as peers and partners. Experienced
intermediaries such as National Performance Network, Alternate ROOTS, the First People’s Fund,
Creative Capital, LINC, and Animating Democracy, and networks such as Art & Democracy, theNational Association of Latino Arts & Culture, and the Community Arts Network have perspective,
history, experience and deep connections to communities, artists, and the work on the ground.
They help to identify practitioners, design effective support programs, and expand resources forthe work through their own program initiatives. Through the grant programs they devise andthose that they administer for other funders, such intermediary organizations provide
infrastructure and continuity for the field that funders themselves cannot. Intermediaries are well
positioned (albeit not well resourced) to advance documentation and collect aggregated data
about impact that can help to build support for this field of practice. Investment in operations fororganizations like those mentioned here, as well as others, is vital for field building.
Reassess the purpose, goals, and activities of the Arts & Social Justice Working Group. The
Working Group can take the occasion of this report and the evidence of growing interest in therole of the arts in social change to take a fresh look at its role and function. It may wish to revisit
and confirm or revise its vision and mission. It may want to consider whether to continue with aloose structure and the annual convening at Grantmakers in the Arts conference as its primaryactivity, or whether there are ways to become more proactive in order to advance field interestsand concerns. It may need to consider whether, as its name suggests, it will be specifically
centered around a social justice agenda, allowing other groups to emerge to focus on otherstrands of interest in arts for change work, or whether membership should be diversified outsideof its primary base of arts grantmakers to include other sector funders—community development,
civic engagement, issue-specific, etc.

Page | 70

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: 2010

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSFirst and foremost, Animating Democracy and Americans for the Arts extend sincere thanks to ourfunding partners who invested in, and made possible, this study: Claudine Brown, former directorof Arts & Culture at the Nathan Cummings Foundation; Ken Grossinger and Micheline Klagsbrun of
the CrossCurrents Foundation; Tim Dorsey, Erlin Ibreck, and Ann Beeson of the Open Society
Foundations, and Michelle Coffey of Lambent Foundation. Their leadership in the field, advisory
support, and investment of resources have been invaluable in shaping and implementing thefunding study as well as the larger Arts & Social Change Mapping Initiative of which it is a part.
In addition to our funding partners, we thank individuals who lent their time and wisdom toreview and comment on a draft of the findings, including Janet Brown of Grantmakers in the Arts,
Bill Cleveland of the Center for Art and Community, Judi Jennings of the Kentucky Foundation for
Women, and Lynn Stern of the Surdna Foundation. We also benefited from feedback fromparticipants in a January 2010 gathering that brought together an intergenerational group of field
leaders from cultural activism, contemporary and community arts, intermediary and service
organizations, curators, organizers, and grantmakers.
We offer warm thanks to colleague Sarah Ingersoll, whose research of private-sector grantmakers
enabled significant targeted dissemination of the survey to funders. She also lent insights andadvice on the survey and collected information from grantmaker affinity groups important inanalysis of the field of philanthropy.
Animating Democracy is grateful to Research Services at Americans for the Arts, including
Research Associate Emily Morrison, who led the survey design, implementation, and statisticalreporting; Meredith Sachs and Amada Alef for assistance with data analysis; and Ben Davidson,
Senior Director of Research Services, for his expert oversight. Special thanks to Joanna Chin,
Animating Democracy Coordinator, who contributed multiple skills to research, analysis, anddesign of the final report. Thank you, too, to copy editors Gayle Stamler and Joan Graney.
Finally, we are most grateful to the many grantmakers who participated in the survey andinterviews, lent lists or otherwise helped in disseminating the survey, and informed our process.
Your contribution of time and information has helped to create this first portrait of funders
supporting the exciting intersection of arts and community, civic, and social change.

Page | 71APPENDICESAppendix 1
List of Survey and Interview Participants* Interview participants (Other interviewees beyond survey participants are listed on the last page.)
Italics indicate those funders who responded that they do not currently fund arts for change work.
Name
Boston Women’s Fund
* California Community Foundation
Chinook Fund
Cleveland Foundation
Community Foundation for Palm Beach & Martin County
Council for the Arts at MIT
East Bay Community Foundation
Foundation For The Carolinas
Funding Exchange, Inc.
Horizons Foundation
McKenzie River Gathering Foundation
Metropolitan Atlanta Arts Fund
Minneapolis Foundation
Saint Paul Foundation* San Diego Foundation
Women's Foundation of Minnesota

Funding Agency Type
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation
Community Foundation

Linked Fate Fund for Justice/Tides DAF* Nelson Fund @ Silicon Valley Community Foundation
Schulman Philanthropies

Donor Advised Fund
Donor Advised Fund
Donor Advised FundA G Foundation* Akonadi Foundation* Bartol Foundation, Stockton Rush
Booth Ferris Foundation
Burkhardt Foundation, Hans G. & Thordis W.
Bush Foundation* Christensen Fund
Colburn Foundation* Durfee Foundation
Falk Foundation* Ford Foundation, Advancing Media Rights and AccessPrivate Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: Appendices

Page | 75

Funders Participating in Arts for Change Survey and Interviews* Interview participants (Other interviewees beyond survey participants are listed on the last page.)
Italics indicate those funders who responded that they do not currently fund arts for change work.

Ford Foundation, Supporting Diverse Art Spaces* GRAMMY Foundation
Heinz Endowments
Houston Endowment, Inc.
James F. and Marion L. Miller Foundation, The* Jerome Foundation* Joyce Foundation* Kentucky Foundation for Women
Knight Foundation, John S. and James L.
* Kresge Foundation, The
Land o'Lakes Foundation
Leeway Foundation
Lesher Foundation, Dean and Margaret
MacArthur Foundation, The John D. and Catherine T.
Matisse Foundation, The Pierre & Tana
Mertz Gilmore Foundation* Nathan Cummings Foundation* Open Society Foundations, Documentary Photography
Project
Pacific Pioneer Fund
* Polk Bros. Foundation
Roberts Foundation, Edward C. and Ann T.
Skillman Foundation* Valentine Foundation
Whitman Institute, The
Woods Fund
Potlatch Fund
Public Domain Foundation

Allen Family Foundation, Paul G.
Carl and Ruth Shapiro Family Foundation* Compton Foundation* CrossCurrents Foundation
Emily Hall Tremaine Foundation
Gerbode Foundation, Wallace Alexander* Herb Alpert Foundation
Page | 76

Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation
Private Foundation(Other: Native American foundation)
Private Foundation(Other: private operating foundation)
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

Funders Participating in Arts for Change Survey and Interviews* Interview participants (Other interviewees beyond survey participants are listed on the last page.)
Italics indicate those funders who responded that they do not currently fund arts for change work.

Homestead Foundation
Hunt Alternatives Fund
Klorfine Foundation
Laird Norton Family Foundation
LEF Foundation
Linde Family Foundation* Pabst Charitable Foundation* Quixote Foundation
Still Water Foundation
Union Square Awards
Vradenburg Foundation, Bee

Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation
Family Foundation

Boeing Corporate Grants
JPMorgan Chase & Company

Corporation
Corporation

Arkansas River Valley Arts CenterDavid Geffen Foundation, The* Lambent Foundation
Martha Richards

Individual Donor
Individual Donor
Individual Donor
Individual Donor

Arts & Business Council of New York
Arts & Culture Alliance of Greater KnoxvilleArts & Science Council Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Inc.
Arts Council, Inc., The
Arts Council of Fairfax County, Inc.
Arts Council of Indianapolis, Inc.
Arts Council Silicon Valley
ArtsinStark
Bronx Council on the Arts
Broward Cultural Division
City of Atlanta Office of Cultural Affairs
City of Austin Cultural Arts Division
City of Dallas Office of Cultural Affairs
City of Honolulu Mayor's Office of Culture and the Arts
City of Los Angeles Department of Cultural Affairs
City of New Haven Department of Cultural Affairs
City of Reno Arts and Culture Commission

Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: Appendices

Page | 77

Funders Participating in Arts for Change Survey and Interviews* Interview participants (Other interviewees beyond survey participants are listed on the last page.)
Italics indicate those funders who responded that they do not currently fund arts for change work.

City of San Antonio Office of Cultural Affairs
City of San Diego, Commission for Arts and Culture
City of Santa Fe Arts Commission
City of Savannah Cultural Affairs
City of Seattle, Office of Arts & Cultural Affairs
City of Ventura, Cultural Affairs Division
Cultural Council of Santa Cruz County
Division of Arts and Cultural Services
Fairbanks Arts Association
Harford County Cultural Arts Board
Houma-Terrebonne Arts & Humanities Council
Howard County Arts Council, Inc.
Jackson Arts Council
Los Angeles County Arts Commission
McLean County Arts CenterNortheast Louisiana Arts Council
Sacramento Metropolitan Arts Commission
San Francisco Arts Commission
St. Louis Regional Arts Commission
Stokes County Arts Council
Tucson - Pima Arts Council
United Arts Council of Raleigh and Wake County
City of Minneapolis, Division of Cultural Affairs
Baltimore Office of Promotion and the Arts, Inc

Montgomery County Arts & Cultural District

Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency
Local Arts Agency (Other: nonprofit
organization and contractuallydesignated LAA)
Local Arts Agency

Cultural Council of Richland & Lexington Counties
Broome County Arts Council
COMPAS
Fine Arts FundHigh Point Area Arts Council, Inc
The Arts Partnership of Greater Spartanburg
United Arts of Central Florida

United Arts Fund and Local Arts Agency
United Arts Fund
United Arts Fund
United Arts Fund
United Arts Fund
United Arts Fund
United Arts Fund

Alaska State Council on the Arts
Arizona Commission on the Arts

State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency

Page | 78

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

Funders Participating in Arts for Change Survey and Interviews* Interview participants (Other interviewees beyond survey participants are listed on the last page.)
Italics indicate those funders who responded that they do not currently fund arts for change work.

Arkansas Arts Council
California Arts Council
Colorado Council on the Arts
DC Commission on the Arts and Humanities
Delaware Division of the Arts
Georgia Council for the Arts
Idaho Commission on the Arts
Kansas Arts Commission
Mississippi Arts Commission
Missouri Arts Council
Nevada Arts Council
New Jersey State Council on the Arts
New Mexico Arts
North Carolina Arts Council
Tennessee Arts Commission
Texas Commission on the Arts
Washington State Arts Commission
Wisconsin Arts Board

State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency
State Arts Agency

Council on the Arts & Humanities for Staten Island
Dane County Cultural Affairs Commission
Northwest Minnesota Arts Council
Polk Arts Alliance, Inc
Salt Lake County Zoo Arts & Park Program (ZAP)
South Arts

Regional Arts Organization
Regional Arts Organization
Regional Arts Organization
Regional Arts Organization
Regional Arts Organization
Regional Arts Organization

Dance USA
National Performance Network

National Arts Organization
National Arts Organization

Dorchester Center for the Arts, Inc.
3Arts
AEPOCH Fund
Alliance for California Traditional Arts
American Jewish World Service
Appalachian Community Fund
Artist Trust
Arts Council of Kern, The

Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: Appendices

Page | 79

Funders Participating in Arts for Change Survey and Interviews* Interview participants (Other interviewees beyond survey participants are listed on the last page.)
Italics indicate those funders who responded that they do not currently fund arts for change work.

ArtsMemphis* Astraea Lesbian Foundation for Justice* CEC ArtsLink, Inc.
Center for Cultural Innovation
Chenango County Council of the Arts
* Creative Capital Foundation
Creative Capital Foundation / MAP Fund
Emanuel Arts Council, Inc.
Environmental Media Fund
Evergreen State College, Longhouse
Germantown Arts Alliance
Houston Arts Alliance
Johnson City Area Arts Council
McCormick Foundation
Metropolitan Regional Arts Council
New England Foundation for the Arts (NEFA)
Pew Charitable Trusts
San Diego Foundation for Change
SEIU* Seventh Generation Fund
Sundance Institute
Women's Fund of Miami DadeThomas S. Kenan Institute for the Arts

Lexington Art League* Alternate ROOTS
Arts of CitizenshipAsian Americans/Pacific Islanders in Philanthropy
Burns Sowder
Crossroads Fund
Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning
Commission, The
Page | 80

Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit Grantmaking Organization
Nonprofit (Other: privately funded
program of the University of North
Carolina School of the Arts)
Nonprofit (Other: visual art center thatprovides resources to implement visual
art engagement programs)
Other: regional arts organization withnational impact
Other: university-based grants program
Other: philanthropic affinity group (thatmakes grants)
Other: marketing consultancy working
with foundation and corporate funding
Other: public foundation
Other: quasi-public governmental
agencyAnimating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

Funders Participating in Arts for Change Survey and Interviews* Interview participants (Other interviewees beyond survey participants are listed on the last page.)
Italics indicate those funders who responded that they do not currently fund arts for change work.

Medina County Arts Council, Inc.
Park District of the City of Fargo Dept. of Culture
Proteus Fund

Other: county arts organization
Other: government
Other: national public foundation* The following organizations or individuals participated in interviews but were not survey
participants:
Arts Rising Giving Circle
Fire This Time Giving Circle
Native Arts and Culture Foundation
Taij Kumarie Moteelall, former executive director, Resource Generation

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: Appendices

Page | 81Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: Appendices

APPENDIX 2 – SURVEY INSTRUMENT
Arts For Change Funder Survey
Welcome to the Arts For Change Funder Survey!
The Nathan Cummings Foundation, Open Society Institute, CrossCurrents Foundation, Lambent
Foundation, and Americans for the Arts are pleased to enlist your participation in the Arts & Social
Change Mapping Initiative's funder survey.
The survey will provide the funding community with a current portrait of support available for arts that
foster civic engagement and social change. It is designed to collect information from a range of funders
including: arts, social justice, and other funders; public and private sector; and agency and individual
funders. Note that, in the survey, "I" refers to individual donors and "we" refers to funding agencies.
The survey’s shorthand language of “arts for change” embraces a broad spectrum of ways that the arts arebeing activated to engage and make change. Civic or social change may be labeled or distinguished as: civic
engagement, community organizing, social change, social justice, participatory democracy, community
building, and community development. Arts may include creative process and product, any of the arts andhumanities disciplines, all forms—traditional and contemporary and popular culture.
For questions regarding the survey or The Arts & Social Change Mapping Initiative contact: Barbara Schaffer
Bacon (bsbacon@artsusa.org). Thank you for your participation!
You may save your survey and return to complete it later by hitting the "Save and Continue Later" buttonon the bottom right. If you'd like to review the survey ahead of time, click "Print Blank Survey" in the top
right corner of this page to open a blank copy of the survey.
Please complete and submit the survey by Friday, December 18. It will take about 20 minutes of your time.
Please note that information marked with an asterisk as "required" has been deemed particulary valuable
by your peers and by Americans for the Arts in terms of portraying support of arts for change work.
______________________________* Required Information.
* 1. Funder / Funding Agency Name:* 2. Name of person completing survey:* 3. E-mail of person completing survey:
4. Please enter your contact information.
(a) Phone Number(b) Street Address* (c) City* (d) Zip Code* 5. State:
6. If your organization has a website, please provide the URL below:

Page | 83

Animating Democracy | Americans for the ArtsSECTION 1: BASICS* 7. Does your answer to question number 1 operate in the private or public sector? (Select one option)
Private sector funder
Public sector funder* 8. Please select the type of funding agency that most accurately describes your organization. (Select one
option)Individual donor
United Way
Private foundation
United Arts Fund
Family foundation
Local Arts Agency
Community foundation
State Arts Agency
Donor advised fundRegional arts organization
Corporation
National arts organization
Donor circle
Nonprofit organization (that makes grants)
Other (REQUIRED -- please provide a description)
9. What is the mission statement that guides your grant making? Feel free to cut and paste from anotherdocument or your website.
10. Rate the importance of each of the following outcomes in the change work that you fund. We areinterested in the social and civic outcomes that you seek through your grant making.
Outcome*(a) Awareness, visibility for an issue*(b) Education about a civic or social
issue*(c) Civic engagement*(d) Dialogue and deliberation*(e) Community building, building
social capital, social networking*(f) Leadership development*(g) Youth development, youth
organizing*(h) Community development(neighborhood, placemaking,economic development, physicalenvironment)*(i) Community assessment,planning, visioning

Page | 84

Very
ImportantSomewhat
ImportantNot very
Important

Not Important at
AllArts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: Appendices*(j) Community organizing, advocacy,mobilizing*(k) Community pride, identity*(l) Fundraising for a cause*(m) Problem solving, improved
conditions, conflict resolution*(n) Policy or systemic change* 11. In which of the following issue areas do you fund projects and/or organizations? (Please check all that
apply.)o Civic participation/engagement, democracyo Race/ethnicity
o Economic development/justiceo Lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgendero Educationo Women and girls
o Environment/environmental justiceo Violence (domestic, gun, etc.)
o Land use
o Criminal justice/juvenile justiceo Community revitalization/regenerationo Media justice/media democracyo Sustainabilityo Peace/conflicto Health and wellnesso Diplomacy and international relationso Homelessness
o Contested historyo Human rights/civil rights
o Arts and cultural policy
o Immigrationo NONE OF THE ABOVEo Other (REQUIRED -- please provide a description)

SECTION 2: THINKING ABOUT YOUR ARTS FOR CHANGE FUNDING* 12. Do you as a donor or does your agency believe that arts and culture can be an effective strategy tomake change? (Select one option.)
Yes, in a significant way
Yes, in a moderate way
Yes, in a limited way
No
Not sure* 13. Do you FUND arts and culture as a strategy to make change? (Select one option.)
Yes, currently fundNot yet but plan to fundFunded in the past but do not currently fund

Page | 85

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
No, do not fund
NOTE: Questions 14 - 19 were for respondents who answered “Funded in the past but do not currently
fund” or “No, do not fund” to Question 13 above.
* 14. What challenges or barriers do you face in supporting arts for change work? (Please check all that
apply.)o Does not fit the missiono Difficulty situating support for this work within a particular departmento Unclear definitions or context for this worko Difficulty establishing cross-departmental/program coordination that would be requiredo Lack of understanding of the role of arts/culture as a strategy for achieving social/civic goalso Lack of fundingo Staff or board are not convinced of the value or impact of arts as a strategy for achievingsocial/civic goals
o Fiscal crisiso Lack of experience designing or administering funding in this areao No current challenges
o Other (REQUIRED -- please provide a description)* 15. What, if any, factors would drive you to support this work?
16. We invite your comment to help us understand the change you seek to make through your grantmaking
and/or approaches to supporting civic or social issue concerns as checked above.

SECTION 3: CONNECTING FURTHER
17. Are there relevant reports, studies, or documentation about your own or other funders' support of artsand change work that you suggest we review? Please offer title and source below.
18. Are you willing to be interviewed to share further perspective? (Select one option)
Yes
No
19. Would you be interested in participating in a one-hour telephone focus group on the subject of arts forchange funding? (Select one option.)
Yes
No

Page | 86

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: AppendicesNote: Questions 20 – 48 were for respondents who answered “Yes, currently fund” or “Not now but plan
to fund” to Question 13.
* 20. I / We would characterize our funding of arts and culture as a strategy for change as follows: (Selectone option.)
I/We directly support artists and/or arts organizations whose work aims for social change.
I/We support social change or other community organizations that may include art and artists intheir change-making strategies.
I/We support both of the above.
21. In our materials, the arts are: (Select one option.)
Explicitly framed as a strategy for making change.
NOT explicitly framed, but we do support change efforts that apply arts and culture.
22. I / We make or plan to make grants supporting work that intentionally applies arts and culture
strategies for change: (Select one option.)
Exclusively
Regularly
Occasionally
RarelyUnsure* 23. What drives your support of arts for change work? (Please check all that apply.)
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

Arts for change strategies fit with my/our mission/goals/strategic direction.
The role of the arts in New Orleans' recovery has brought the value of the arts into focus.
Arts for change strategies are supported by one or more trustees.
I/We believe in the power of the arts for change.
Arts for change strategies are supported by one or more donors.
I/We see evidence that arts for change strategies are working.
I/We are inspired by grantees' success and/or programs.
I/We see that the arts can advance strategies for change.
Other (REQUIRED -- please provide a response)

24. What was the approximate total funding granted to support arts for change work in your most recently
completed fiscal year?
* 25. In which of the following issue areas do you fund or plan to fund ARTS and CULTURE STRATEGIES?
Note: Previously you were asked about the entire scope of projects and organizations that you fund. Pleasecheck only the issues in which you fund ARTS and CULTURE strategies. (Please check all that apply.)o Civic participation/engagement, democracyo Race/ethnicity
o Economic development/justiceo Lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgendero Educationo Women and girls
o Environment/environmental justiceo Violence (domestic, gun, etc.)

Page | 87

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

Land use
Criminal justice/juvenile justiceCommunity revitalization/regeneration
Media justice/media democracy
Sustainability
Peace/conflict
Health and wellness
Diplomacy and international relations
Homelessness
Contested history
Human rights/civil rights
Arts and cultural policy
Immigration
NONE OF THE ABOVE
Other (REQUIRED -- please provide a description)* 26. What challenges or barriers do you face in supporting arts for change work? (Please check all that
apply.)o Does not fit the missiono Difficulty situating support for this work within a particular departmento Unclear definitions or context for this worko Difficulty establishing cross-departmental/program coordination that would be requiredo Lack of understanding of the role of arts/culture as a strategy for achieving social/civic goalso Lack of fundingo Staff or board are not convinced of the value or impact of arts as a strategy for achievingsocial/civic goals
o Fiscal crisiso Lack of experience designing or administering funding in this areao No current challenges
o Other (REQUIRED -- please provide a description)
27. What do you require of grantees regarding assessment of the social or civic impact of their arts forchange work? (Please check all that apply.)o Evaluation with no particular conditionso Benchmarks or indicators of successo Evaluation and provide guidelines
o Evaluation conducted by an external evaluatoro Participation in our agency-led evaluation efforts or systems
o Do not require evaluation
28. Do you provide additional funds to support costs related to evaluation? (Select one option.)
Always provide
Sometimes provide
Never provide
29. Please use this space to provide any comments that would help us understand the change you seek tomake through your grantmaking and/or approaches to supporting civic or social issue concerns as checked
above.

Page | 88

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: Appendices

SECTION 3: SPECIFIC PROGRAMS THAT FUND ARTS FOR CHANGE
We would like to know about specific funding programs or initiatives that support arts for change.
* 30. The arts as a change strategy are supported: (Select one option.)
Through general grantmaking
Within one program area/department
Through multiple discrete program areas or departments
Through inter-program/department collaboration
Not Applicable
31. Please list the program area(s)/department(s) that support the arts as a change strategy.
32. How many funding programs or initiatives do you currently operate that support arts and culture
strategies for change?

SECTION 4: CONNECTING FURTHER
33. Are there relevant reports, studies, or documentation about your own or other funders' support of artsand change work that you suggest we review? Please offer title and source below.
34. Are you willing to be interviewed to share further perspective? (Select one option.)
Yes
No
35. Would you be interested in participating in a one-hour telephone focus group on the subject of arts forchange funding? (Select one option.)
Yes
No
Your colleagues can benefit from specific information on your funding programs that support arts andculture strategies for making change. We appreciate your time to complete this part of the survey.
* 36. How many of your programs that support arts and culture strategies for change would you be willingto provide more information about (up to 3)?
0
1
2
3
You responded that you would like to provide information on ___one, two, or three____ program(s) or
initiative(s) that support arts and culture strategies for change. This page will repeat itself ___one, two, or
three___ time(s). Each time it repeats, dedicate the questions below to one of these unique programs. The
goal is that we will collect this information for each of your programs (one program per page). If you havequestions about this process, e-mail Barbara Schaffer Bacon at bsbacon@artsusa.org.
Note: All questions from Q37 to Q48 are looped and they need to be answered multiple times based on theanswer to Q36.

Page | 89

Animating Democracy | Americans for the Arts

* 37. Name of grant program/initiative:* 38. Name and title of contact person:* 39. Is there a website with further information about this program? (Select one option)
No URL for this program
Yes (REQUIRED -- provide the URL)
* 40. Funding program purpose and goals:
41. Types of activity funded (e.g. artist residences, arts presentations such as performance, exhibitions,
campaigns, mobilizing events):
42. Information about recent grants made supporting arts and change work is: (Select one option.)
Available on our agency website
Available on request
Not available at this time* 43. Which disciplines are eligible for funding? (Note: If funding is restricted to certain disciplines and art
forms, please check all that apply.)o ALL artistic disciplines
o Visual art
o Theater/Performance art
o Danceo Humanities/historyo Music
o Literatureo Media artso New media
o Multi/inter-disciplinary artso Designo Public art
o Traditional/cultural* 44. Who is eligible to apply? (Please check all that apply.)o Arts organizationso Community organizations
o Government unitso Individual artists* 45. Restrictions: (Please check all that apply.)o Grants to non-profit organizations onlyo Geographic by cityo Geographic by stateo Geographic by regiono Noneo Other (REQUIRED -- please provide a description)

Page | 90

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: Appendices46. What kind of support does the program provide? (Please check all that apply.)o Project support
o General operating support
o Planning support
o Other (REQUIRED -- please provide a description)* 47. Average grant amounts are within the following range: (Select one option.)
Under $5,000$5,000 - $14,999$15,000 - $29,999$30,000 - $49,999$50,000 - $74,999$75,000 - $100,000
Over $100,000
48. Approximate number of grants awarded through this program in the most recently completed calendar
year: (Select one option.)
Less than 10
10 - 25
26 - 50More than 50
To complete your survey, please press the "Submit" button! THANK YOU!

Page | 91

Animating Democracy | Americans for the ArtsAPPENDIX 3
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Arts for Change Grantmaker Research
The following questions formed the core of phone interviews conducted by one or both Animating
Democracy co-directors. Questions particular to each funder were also asked based on their completed
survey, a review of their web sites and materials, and to follow valuable threads that emerged in theinterview. Most interviews were one-on-one but some were conducted with two or three grantmakers
together who shared some affinity.
1. How does arts for social change support relate to your grantmaking goals?
How do you think about arts in the context of your social change funding (community
development, community building, social justice)? OR
How do you think about social change (community, civic) in the context of your arts funding? OR
How are arts and social change integrated?
2. What does support of arts for social change look like in your grantmaking?
Describe one or two projects, organizations, or artists you’ve funded that you feel exemplify/have
met the mark of your arts for change funding goals.
3. How does your funding organization think and talk about arts for change work?
Is this a conversation at all in your organization?
4. What drives you to support this work? What are barriers or challenges you encounter in supporting it?
5. What are your expectations for social (community, civic) change and what change do you observe as aresult of your arts-for-change grantmaking?
6. What could be done to stimulate thinking, improve the environment, and/or increase support of thiswork?
As relevant in relation to the role of intermediaries:
7. As an intermediary that secures funds from other funders in order to carry out your own grantmaking
interests; or to administer grants for other funders:
Describe your role and how you work in relation to other funders.
What are the challenges and opportunities of working as an intermediary to support arts forchange work?
8. As a funder who supports work through intermediaries:
What role do intermediaries play in relation to your funding of arts for change?
What are the pros and cons of working through intermediaries to support this work?

Page | 92

Arts & Social Change Grantmaking Report: Appendices

APPENDIX 4
FUNDING REPORT REFERENCES
Arts & Social Justice Working Group. “Meeting minutes of the Art and Social Justice Funders Meeting,”
February 23, 2007, prepared by Caron Atlas, 2007.
Bearman, Jessica E. “More Giving Together: The Growth and Impact of Giving Circles and Shared Giving.”
Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers, 2007. www.givingforum.org/givingcircles
Fulton, William and Morris Newman. “The Arts and Smart Growth: The Role of Arts in Placemaking.”
Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities and Grantmakers in the Arts, 2003.
“Investing in Our Communities: Strategies for Immigrant Integration.” Grantmakers Concerned with
Immigrants and Refugees, 2006. www.gcir.org“The Impact of Giving Together: A Snapshot of a study on Giving Circles’ Influence on Philanthropic & Civic
Behaviors, Knowledge & Attitudes.” Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers, 2009.
www.givingforum.org/givingcircles“Investing in Youth Media.” Open Society Institute, 2006. www.gfem.org
Kanter, Beth and Allison H. Fine. “The Giving Challenge 2009: Assessment and Reflection Report.” Case
Foundation, 2009. www.casefoundation.org
Kaufman, Peter B. and Mary Albon. “Funding Media, Strengthening Democracy: Grantmaking for the 21stCentury.” Grantmakers in Film and Electronic Media, 2010. www.gfem.org
Korza, Pam and Barbara Schaffer Bacon. “Artists Engaging in Social Change.” Surdna Foundation, 2010.
www.surdna.org
Lawrence, Steven, editor. “Social Justice Grantmaking II: An Update on U.S. Foundation Trends.” The
Foundation Center, 2009.
Marcus, Laura R., editor in collaboration with Daranee Petsod and Amy E. Skillman. “The Art of Community:
Creativity at the Crossroads of Immigrant Cultures and Social Services.” Institute for Cultural Partnerships
and Grantmakers Concerned with Immigrants and Refugees, 2006. www.gcir.org“Resource Generation Ten Years: Annual Report 2006 – 2007.” Resource Generation, 2007.
www.resourcegeneration.org.

Page | 93

In addition to this findings report, additional resources are available to funders on Animating
Democracy’s website (www.AmericansForTheArts.org/AnimatingDemocracy). A Statistical Reportprovides additional charts and graphs with data summaries based on the survey of grantmakers
conducted by Americans for the Arts. The Directory of Funders identifies and profiles more than
150 private- and public-sector grantmakers that are supporting arts for change work. Please callAmericans for the Arts (202.371.2830) for additional information and access to these resources.

WASHINGTON, DC OFFICE
1000 Vermont Avenue, NW
6th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
T 202-371-2830
F 202-371-0424
NEW YORK OFFICE
One East 53rd Street
2nd Floor
New York, NY 10022
T 212-223-2787
F 212-980-4857

info@artsusa.org
www.AmericansForTheArts.org/AnimatingDemocracy

Copyright 2010 Americans for the Arts
Printed in the United States