RESEARCH

Plural is designed to heighten the relevance of arts-related research to policy and practice through the following: (i) expanding knowledge of ethnocultural arts organizations and thereby increasing visibility amongst the general public and deepening understanding amongst policymakers and funders; (ii) identifying existing supports available to these organizations and thereby leading to the increased use of existing supports; and (iii) revealing gaps and inefficiencies in the existing support infrastructure and thereby assisting these supports in designing and prioritizing their programs.

Primarily a research project, research addressed the following specific questions:

1. What are the current characteristics, needs and challenges of Canadian and US ethnocultural arts organizations as a whole, and how do organizations targeting different ethnic groups compare regarding their characteristics, needs, challenges, and support systems?

2. How many support systems currently focus on ethnocultural arts organizations, what services do they provide, where are they located, and what are their target ethnic group(s)?

3. Do the services offered by support systems correlate with the needs of ethnocultural arts organizations?

We divided our research process into five components designed to address the three categories of our research questions (characteristics, needs, and support systems): (i) undertaking a literature review; (ii) building a database of ethnocultural arts organizations; (iii) conducting a needs assessment; (iv) undertaking an assessment of the supports systems; and (v) preparing recommendations. Our methodology was both quantitative and qualitative in nature to obtain a macro-level view of the field and to delve deeper into understanding needs and possible means of addressing those needs. Throughout every phase of our research, we actively sought the input and feedback of project stakeholders. We solicited such review by assembling a 13-member advisory committee to formally advise on the project and obtained support on an informal basis from additional project stakeholders and other individuals as appropriate.

The research design set forth below provides a more detailed discussion of project activities and methodology; if you would like more information, please contact us. The project began in January 2012.

Literature Review

From February until November 2012, we reviewed literature and other materials directly examining or related to the ethnocultural arts sector (e.g., literature concerning ethnic arts, folk arts, small arts organizations, and the informal arts). The purpose of this review was to identify existing research to assist with determining project scope, to reduce duplication of existing research, to identify experts in the field who could provide input to ensure our project’s relevancy, to better understand the history of the field and current issues, and to consolidate existing information.

In addition to running standard database searches, our literature review included a concerted effort to identify “grey literature” (key reports and needs assessments informally published and not widely accessible) through conversations with over 80 individuals, including cultural policy scholars and other academics, funders, staff of arts service organizations and arts organizations, and advocates in the field. While this component of the project was formally completed at the end of 2012, we continued to identify and review relevant literature, and to conduct informational interviews, through the drafting period for the resultant book, Figuring the Plural.

Database

Through review and analysis of datasets from the Canada Revenue Agency, the National Center for Charitable Statistics, Internal Revenue Service Form 990 filings on GuideStar, organizational websites, organizational names and directories gleaned from our literature review, and information gained during the course of our needs assessment, we created separate databases of Canadian and US ethnocultural arts organizations that appear to be currently active and registered as charities (Canada) or incorporated as nonprofits (US). When available and/or applicable, fields included in the databases are organizational name, Business Number/Employer Identification Number, implicated census racial group(s), specific ethnic group(s), practiced artistic discipline(s), address, geographic region, website, date of tax exempt status, annual reported gross income for the years 2009-2012, mission/mandate, and special considerations such as whether an organization’s primary or only arts activity involved producing a festival and/or if an organization appeared to function as both an arts organization and arts service organization.

These databases formed the “working population” (a list that attempts to be representative of the general population but will almost always contain omissions and errors, not the least of which is that it requires us as researchers to select and apply our own definitions in creating the list) for the needs assessment component of the project and provided us with information regarding the current characteristics of ethnocultural arts organizations as a whole and by pan racial group. There are more than 250 organizations listed in the Canadian database and more than 2,000 organizations listed in the US database.

We began working on the databases during the summer of 2012 and completed the Canadian database (for needs assessment purposes) in January 2013 and the US database (for needs assessment purposes) in July 2013. While we were unable to continue to add organizations to the databases for purposes of participation in the needs assessment, we continued to add/revise the list through the fall of 2014 to maximize its use to the field.

Needs Assessment

Our needs assessment consisted of both (i) nationwide surveys administered electronically through the web-based survey tool Survey Monkey and distributed to all organizations contained in our databases and for which we were able to obtain email contact information and (ii) interviews with a smaller group of these organizations, arts service organizations, and arts funders. Our survey and interview questions were developed following fieldwork at a Native cultural center in New Mexico during the summer of 2012, review of previous Canadian and US needs assessments identified through our literature review, discussions with an arts marketing firm, our advisory committee, and the department chair of the Arts Administration and Policy program at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, and pilot testing with a group of Chicago-based ethnocultural arts organizations in the months of December 2012 and January 2013.

The final survey distributed to organizations contained a mix of fixed-answer and open-ended questions that covered basic organizational characteristics (e.g., years in operation, staff and volunteer size, operating budgets), self-assessment of organizational strengths and weaknesses, short-term and long-term needs, and use of support systems. All organizations received the same survey, with a few distinctions. The Canadian survey was prepared in English and French while one of the US survey links was prepared in English and Spanish, and survey text and answer choices reflected country specific differences in terminology, geography, political structures, and funding systems. Organizations also received one of eleven survey links based on country of operation and the pan racial category/ies indicated by organizational mission statement (in Canada: Aboriginal, Culturally Diverse, or White; in the United States: American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black, Latino & Caribbean, Multiracial, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, Some Other Race or White). In the US, surveys were released to organizations in six waves (Canadian organizations were sent the survey in one wave). The Canadian survey opened on February 4, 2013, and the first US survey wave on March 19, 2013. All surveys closed on October 18, 2013, for analysis of survey results.

To supplement survey responses and to obtain a deeper understanding of current and emerging needs and challenges, innovative means of addressing these challenges, feedback regarding existing support systems, and tools/services/resources that could better support the field, we also conducted in-person and phone meetings and site visits with a smaller group of ethnocultural arts organizations. These organizations were identified by the project team through the database creation process, self-identified in the survey (i.e., expressed an interest in participating in an interview), and/or were suggested by the advisory committee and other project stakeholders. Organizational interview participants came from a range of ethnic communities and arts disciplines, and differed in organizational age and size.

Our Canadian in-person organizational interviews took place during the months of April and May 2013 and with organizations located in the following cities and provinces: Vancouver, Burnaby, and Richmond (British Columbia); Edmonton (Alberta); Saskatoon and Regina (Saskatchewan); Winnipeg (Manitoba); Toronto, Ottawa, and Manitoulin Island (Ontario); Iqaluit (Nunavut); and Halifax (Nova Scotia). Phone interviews continued up through October 2013 and included additional organizations located in these cities, other cities in these provinces, and in Montréal (Québec).

Our US in-person organizational interviews took place from June to October 2013 and with organizations based in the following cities and states: Los Angeles, Santa Ana, Beverly Hills, San Francisco, Berkeley, Redwood City, and San Pablo (California); Phoenix (Arizona); Houston and San Antonio (Texas); Needham and Somerville (Massachusetts); Washington, D.C.; New York (New York); St. Paul and Minneapolis (Minnesota); Norcross, Atlanta/Dunwoody, and Townsend (Georgia); Chesterfield and St. Louis (Missouri); and Chicago (Illinois). Phone interviews continued into November 2013 and included additional organizations located in these cities, other cities in these states, and in Warm Springs (Oregon); Seattle (Washington State), Delta (Pennsylvania), Columbia (South Carolina), Boise (Idaho), and Honolulu (Hawaii). We interviewed 40 Canadian and 68 US organizations for a total of 108 ethnocultural organizations.

Information from the survey and organizational interviews was also informed by our interviews with arts service organizations and arts funders as part of the supports assessment process.

Support Systems Assessment

Our support systems assessment consisted of the following: (i) the creation of a support systems database; (ii) formal phone interviews with arts service organizations and arts-related funders; and (iii) the feedback of art organizations as part of our needs assessment.

Our research to the support systems component of the project was based on the framework of arts support structures outlined in the 2005 Boston Foundation report on arts service organizations.[1] This study identified the following seven categories of services provided by arts service organizations/support systems: (i) advocacy/policy-related action; (ii) contracted/group services; (iii) convening & networking; (iv) education and training; (v) financial support; (vi) information & research; and (vii) promotion & audience development. Our literature review indicated that ethnocultural arts organizations consistently identified six of these support systems (i-v, and vii) as key, and thus our analysis focused on these six services and considered services related to artist spaces.

To identify and map ethnocultural support systems, we analyzed information on these systems contained in existing data sources provided by the Canada Revenue Agency, National Center for Charitable Statistics, the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, public reports from Canadian and US governmental arts agencies and foundations, and other sources. We reviewed these sources to create our own databases of support systems offering any of our targeted services that have programs focused on ethnocultural arts organizations. Where applicable, and in addition to information regarding these services, our database fields contain information on geographic location, targeted racial/ethnic group(s), targeted artistic discipline(s), and funding amounts.

The supports databases provided us with information on currently active arts-related service organizations with programs focused on ethnocultural communities. We began working on these databases in September 2012 and completed the Canadian database in October 2013 and the US database in February 2014. There are almost 100 organizations listed in our Canadian supports database and almost 250 organizations listed in our US supports database.

To obtain another perspective on the expressed needs and support systems of ethnocultural arts organizations and to learn more about past and current programs, we interviewed a limited number of arts service organizations and funders. We identified funder and arts service organization interview participants through the literature review process, needs assessment interviews and survey responses, and recommendations from ongoing support systems interviews identifying individuals possessing experience working with programs focused on ethnocultural arts organizations. Formal funder interviews began in December 2012 and arts service organization interviews began in June 2013; all interviews were completed by February 2014.

Our Canadian interviews took place with organizations located in the following cities and provinces: Brentwood Bay, Vancouver, and Victoria (British Columbia); Edmonton (Alberta); Winnipeg (Manitoba); Toronto, Ottawa, and Kitchener (Ontario); Montréal (Québec); Whitehorse (Yukon); and Yellowknife (Northwest Territories). In Canada, we spoke with one national arts funding agency, four provincial arts and non-arts agencies, one foundation, and seven arts service organizations.

Our US interviews took place with organizations located in the following cities and states: Boston (Massachusetts); Sacramento and San Francisco (California); Brooklyn and New York (New York); Rapid City (South Dakota); Washington (DC); and Providence (Rhode Island).  In the United States, we spoke with one national arts funding agency, two state arts agencies, one ethnocultural funder, and 11 arts service organizations.

Our final supports interviews consisted of 16 individuals from 13 Canadian organizations and 15 individuals from 15 US organizations for a total of 31 supports interview participants.

Recommendations & Report/Artist Book

Recommendations regarding means of better supporting and strengthening the field were based on survey and interview feedback, our own analysis of project findings, and the direct participation and feedback of project participants and advisors. Conceived of as a combination of report and artist book, a draft document of findings and recommendations was submitted for review by our advisory committee and project stakeholders identified through the research process who expressed an interest in deeper engagement in the project. Following review of stakeholder comments and appropriate revisions, the book was prepared for public dissemination in October 2014.

 

 

---