The debilitating impact that sustained cuts to public funding are having on museums and galleries has pushed the role of trusts and foundations into the spotlight.
Donations from trusts towards museum projects run into many millions each year.
A recent recipient is Imperial War Museums (IWM), which received £5m from the Pears Foundation in September for the renewal of its Holocaust exhibition. Diane Lees, its director- general, says that this is one of the largest donations from a foundation that the museum has ever received.
The £15m project will put more personal stories and survivor testimonies at the heart of the exhibition, which will open in 2021.
IWM has also submitted a bid to the UK Holocaust Memorial Foundation to allow IWM London to house a new Holocaust memorial and learning centre.
Shared values
Lees says the investment from the Pears Foundation, headed by businessman and philanthropist Trevor Pears, is also significant because it has resulted from a long- standing relationship based on shared values.
“With certain trusts and foundations, there is a particularly special relationship that has developed over a number of years,” she says.
“It’s about a shared set of values, rather than the rattling-of-the-tin approach.”
The Sainsbury Family Charitable Trusts cover a number of organisations that provide funding, including the Monument Trust, which provides lots of support for museums. Its 2014 annual report revealed that it approved 68 grants totalling £27,490,772 for arts and heritage organisations.
The British Museum, meanwhile, received £25m for its World Conservation Centre from the Sainsburys’ Linbury Trust and Monument Trust.
Over the past few years, the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge benefited from £6m from
the Monument Trust for its exhibition programme, while the Victoria and Albert Museum, Tate Britain and the Royal Academy of Arts have received substantial support from the Sainsbury trusts.
Much of the debate around the role of trusts and foundations in the current funding environment has explored whether they should provide grants to help cultural institutions plug holes in core budgets and provide funding for everyday operating costs.
This type of approach is being seen in the US, where the New York- based Ford Foundation recently announced a change in the way in which it will distribute funding.
President Darren Walker has committed to doubling the amount of money dedicated to operating costs and ensuring the long-term sustainability of arts organisations.
Historically, UK-based trusts and foundations have primarily delivered funding on a project-specific basis, but there is a willingness to offer more flexible funding.
Moira Sinclair, the chief executive of the Paul Hamlyn Foundation, said: “The idea of a mixed economy for culture has long been an attractive one in the UK. It means that no one group, be it state or donor, public or corporate, has undue influence on the mission, values and delivery of a cultural organisation – and that still feels right to me.
“And within that mix,I think there is room for project funding as well as core funding, especially if you consider the very different operating scales of trusts and foundations.”
While infrastructure and major capital projects are still likely to get the lion’s share of funding, there is scope to offer grants on a discretionary basis, says Alan Bookbinder, the director of the Sainsbury Family Charitable Trusts.
He says the grant given to the Fitzwilliam Museum to cover the running costs of its exhibition programme can also be used for core operational costs should the need arise. “The director can choose what kinds of core costs will be covered each year,” says Bookbinder.
“Normally, a museum will identify a particular need and we will respond to that. But sometimes it makes sense to allow the museum more discretion because, obviously, it will be raising money from other sources as well.
It helps for museums to have flexibility, so they can allocate funds from other sources to specific things, and know that our funding can be used flexibly when the need arises.”
Another way that trusts
and foundations can boost a museum’s core budget is by supporting endowments. The Ashmolean in Oxford announced last year that it is aiming to raise a £50m endowment, which it is hoped will provide at least 20% of its annual operating costs and deliver about £2m a year.
According to Bookbinder, the Sainsbury Monument Trust is increasingly making contributions to museums’ endowments, including that of Chichester’s Pallant House Gallery, which receives matched funding through ACE’s Catalyst endowment programme.
However Rachel Cockett, the director of development at Birmingham Museums Trust, has reservations about relying on trusts and foundations to provide one- off grants for core costs.
“I don’t think it is a good long-term strategy to replace falling public funding with occasional grants from trusts and foundations,” she says.
“Even if they are saying they will cover core funding, it is only going to be on a temporary basis – you would only be getting it for a year or two before that hole [in the budget] appears again.”
Instead, says Cockett, museums and galleries should aim to raise funds for projects that will generate new income, boost visitor numbers and increase ticket and retail sales.
“We don’t just want to jump on funding streams and change projects to fit them,” Cockett says.
“We are really working at developing the projects and then looking for the funding.
“We have been careful about our business planning. Whether it is a gallery refurbishment project or a new learning programme, it is all about how it will contribute to the [organisation’s] income.”
Lees says she would also be reluctant to ask a trust or foundation for help with core funding. “I think we expect more from trusts and foundations because of the financial crisis, and I think it’s fair to say that they can’t step up and fill every gap,” she says.
Core funding
While a trust or foundation may provide funding for capital projects or a curatorial post, according to Lees, there isn’t an appetite for core funding.
“This country has a unique position – most of the public think that public money should be used to invest in arts and culture and this has always been different from the American model.”
Lees also points out that trusts and foundations are set up for very different purposes and will clearly indicate whether they are focused on capital or revenue funding.
“I wouldn’t want to see them as the people who pay the electricity bill,” she says.
"We should acknowledge the challenge implied in that question – that charitable foundations, not accountable to the market or the politicians, could be seen as distorting public policy on the whim of the unelected. But I don’t think that reflects the current reality.
And the alternative – that we somehow don’t encourage those with wealth to support people experiencing disadvantage – seems perverse.
The best charitable foundations are professional and transparent, and getting more so. They are driven to make connections as widely as they can, and passionate about creating social change in partnership with those that they fund.
There is a power dynamic, but a charitable foundation can support independence and challenge. It can fund and shine a light on the unpopular. It can take risks, fund outside of political cycles and fund long term. That seems a pretty good role to aspire to."
Moira Sinclair is the chief executive of the Paul Hamlyn Foundation
Donations from trusts towards museum projects run into many millions each year.
A recent recipient is Imperial War Museums (IWM), which received £5m from the Pears Foundation in September for the renewal of its Holocaust exhibition. Diane Lees, its director- general, says that this is one of the largest donations from a foundation that the museum has ever received.
The £15m project will put more personal stories and survivor testimonies at the heart of the exhibition, which will open in 2021.
IWM has also submitted a bid to the UK Holocaust Memorial Foundation to allow IWM London to house a new Holocaust memorial and learning centre.
Shared values
Lees says the investment from the Pears Foundation, headed by businessman and philanthropist Trevor Pears, is also significant because it has resulted from a long- standing relationship based on shared values.
“With certain trusts and foundations, there is a particularly special relationship that has developed over a number of years,” she says.
“It’s about a shared set of values, rather than the rattling-of-the-tin approach.”
The Sainsbury Family Charitable Trusts cover a number of organisations that provide funding, including the Monument Trust, which provides lots of support for museums. Its 2014 annual report revealed that it approved 68 grants totalling £27,490,772 for arts and heritage organisations.
The British Museum, meanwhile, received £25m for its World Conservation Centre from the Sainsburys’ Linbury Trust and Monument Trust.
Over the past few years, the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge benefited from £6m from
the Monument Trust for its exhibition programme, while the Victoria and Albert Museum, Tate Britain and the Royal Academy of Arts have received substantial support from the Sainsbury trusts.
Much of the debate around the role of trusts and foundations in the current funding environment has explored whether they should provide grants to help cultural institutions plug holes in core budgets and provide funding for everyday operating costs.
This type of approach is being seen in the US, where the New York- based Ford Foundation recently announced a change in the way in which it will distribute funding.
President Darren Walker has committed to doubling the amount of money dedicated to operating costs and ensuring the long-term sustainability of arts organisations.
Historically, UK-based trusts and foundations have primarily delivered funding on a project-specific basis, but there is a willingness to offer more flexible funding.
Moira Sinclair, the chief executive of the Paul Hamlyn Foundation, said: “The idea of a mixed economy for culture has long been an attractive one in the UK. It means that no one group, be it state or donor, public or corporate, has undue influence on the mission, values and delivery of a cultural organisation – and that still feels right to me.
“And within that mix,I think there is room for project funding as well as core funding, especially if you consider the very different operating scales of trusts and foundations.”
While infrastructure and major capital projects are still likely to get the lion’s share of funding, there is scope to offer grants on a discretionary basis, says Alan Bookbinder, the director of the Sainsbury Family Charitable Trusts.
He says the grant given to the Fitzwilliam Museum to cover the running costs of its exhibition programme can also be used for core operational costs should the need arise. “The director can choose what kinds of core costs will be covered each year,” says Bookbinder.
“Normally, a museum will identify a particular need and we will respond to that. But sometimes it makes sense to allow the museum more discretion because, obviously, it will be raising money from other sources as well.
It helps for museums to have flexibility, so they can allocate funds from other sources to specific things, and know that our funding can be used flexibly when the need arises.”
Another way that trusts
and foundations can boost a museum’s core budget is by supporting endowments. The Ashmolean in Oxford announced last year that it is aiming to raise a £50m endowment, which it is hoped will provide at least 20% of its annual operating costs and deliver about £2m a year.
According to Bookbinder, the Sainsbury Monument Trust is increasingly making contributions to museums’ endowments, including that of Chichester’s Pallant House Gallery, which receives matched funding through ACE’s Catalyst endowment programme.
However Rachel Cockett, the director of development at Birmingham Museums Trust, has reservations about relying on trusts and foundations to provide one- off grants for core costs.
“I don’t think it is a good long-term strategy to replace falling public funding with occasional grants from trusts and foundations,” she says.
“Even if they are saying they will cover core funding, it is only going to be on a temporary basis – you would only be getting it for a year or two before that hole [in the budget] appears again.”
Instead, says Cockett, museums and galleries should aim to raise funds for projects that will generate new income, boost visitor numbers and increase ticket and retail sales.
“We don’t just want to jump on funding streams and change projects to fit them,” Cockett says.
“We are really working at developing the projects and then looking for the funding.
“We have been careful about our business planning. Whether it is a gallery refurbishment project or a new learning programme, it is all about how it will contribute to the [organisation’s] income.”
Lees says she would also be reluctant to ask a trust or foundation for help with core funding. “I think we expect more from trusts and foundations because of the financial crisis, and I think it’s fair to say that they can’t step up and fill every gap,” she says.
Core funding
While a trust or foundation may provide funding for capital projects or a curatorial post, according to Lees, there isn’t an appetite for core funding.
“This country has a unique position – most of the public think that public money should be used to invest in arts and culture and this has always been different from the American model.”
Lees also points out that trusts and foundations are set up for very different purposes and will clearly indicate whether they are focused on capital or revenue funding.
“I wouldn’t want to see them as the people who pay the electricity bill,” she says.
What is the role of charitable foundations based on wealth in a democracy?
"We should acknowledge the challenge implied in that question – that charitable foundations, not accountable to the market or the politicians, could be seen as distorting public policy on the whim of the unelected. But I don’t think that reflects the current reality.
And the alternative – that we somehow don’t encourage those with wealth to support people experiencing disadvantage – seems perverse.
The best charitable foundations are professional and transparent, and getting more so. They are driven to make connections as widely as they can, and passionate about creating social change in partnership with those that they fund.
There is a power dynamic, but a charitable foundation can support independence and challenge. It can fund and shine a light on the unpopular. It can take risks, fund outside of political cycles and fund long term. That seems a pretty good role to aspire to."
Moira Sinclair is the chief executive of the Paul Hamlyn Foundation
