The recent Arts Council England (ACE) announcement about which organisations would be part of its new national portfolio brought mixed news.
But for audience development agencies, it was uniformly bad: none of the seven agencies which have been receiving ACE support under the regularly funded organisations (RFOs) system were given national portfolio status.
The arts council argued that it had made a strategic decision to cut the number of what it calls “intermediate organisations” that it has funded.
There are 12 audience development agencies in the UK. Of the eight in England, seven received regular funding, accounting for £1.25m (0.4%) of ACE’s RFO investment.
Audience development agencies were shocked by the decision. They said they had applied for national portfolio status in good faith and believed their applications would be judged on individual merit, rather than a blanket decision by ACE to end support for this area of work.
The backdrop to the ACE decision is a wider government agenda to concentrate resources on “frontline services” and reduce the number of quangos.
In July last year, communities secretary Eric Pickles questioned the role of audience development officers. This was followed in October by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport’s announcement that 19 of the 55 quangos it supported would be abolished or reformed. This included the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA), which will be incorporated into ACE by 1 October.
ACE has not only cut support for audience development agencies, but has turned down applications for national portfolio funding by other organisations that support the arts, most notably the Visual Arts and Galleries Association.
The decision to reduce the number of intermediate organisations that ACE supports is part of a strategy to focus funding on individual arts organisations, rather than those that provide support to them.
Creativity, Culture and Education, which delivered Creative Partnerships, had its funding cut in half by ACE last year. In its place, £10.5m of lottery money will be devoted each year to help the national portfolio organisations connect the work produced by arts bodies to communities and school.
ACE is also hoping to create a small number of “leadership” organisations that will take responsibility for the development of the arts. The idea is that individual arts organisations, rather than intermediate agencies, will spread expertise to those who have less resources and capacity.
Some intermediate agencies did gain national portfolio funding. These include the National Skills Academy Creative & Cultural, which oversees a network of training providers and employers that support the skills needs of the creative and cultural industries.
But overall, the idea of funding intermediate agencies has been rejected, and this is frustrating for those involved in areas such as audience development.
Audiences UK, a national network of audience development agencies, has argued that a blanket decision not to fund their work is hard to understand in the context of the priority ACE is giving to increasing and broadening audiences in its 10-year Achieving Great Art for Everyone strategy.
Audience development agencies say they provide effective and cheap ways to deliver broader and increased audiences for the arts. However, now the dust has settled since the ACE funding announcement, the future does not look entirely bleak for audience development agencies.
Arts council funding makes up about 20% of their income, and many have a range of revenue streams.
Moreover, Audiences UK says the ACE decision is not a vote of no confidence, more that ACE does not see regular funding as the best way to support this activity.
The arts council has said it will be looking into ways in which it can build on this work, albeit with a focus on programmes of activity and reduced overheads.
Audience development agencies will be able to apply for ACE’s £48m Grants for the Arts scheme, which is for project work. Unlike RFOs, national portfolio organisations will no longer be able to access this funding stream, which ACE says will free up £12m a year.
Audience development agencies are now hoping for clarity and direction as to how much money for audience development projects would be available under Grants for the Arts.
So what are the implications for museums, now that the functions of the MLA are being transferred to ACE? Understanding audiences and their needs is one of the areas of work that museums have made progress on in the past decade.
Much of this work has been carried out collaboratively, often through bodies that could be described as intermediate agencies.
Indeed, some museums have been working closely with arts council-funded audience development agencies. Many museums will be unwilling to see the networks that have sprung up to support this work threatened.
But for audience development agencies, it was uniformly bad: none of the seven agencies which have been receiving ACE support under the regularly funded organisations (RFOs) system were given national portfolio status.
The arts council argued that it had made a strategic decision to cut the number of what it calls “intermediate organisations” that it has funded.
There are 12 audience development agencies in the UK. Of the eight in England, seven received regular funding, accounting for £1.25m (0.4%) of ACE’s RFO investment.
Audience development agencies were shocked by the decision. They said they had applied for national portfolio status in good faith and believed their applications would be judged on individual merit, rather than a blanket decision by ACE to end support for this area of work.
The backdrop to the ACE decision is a wider government agenda to concentrate resources on “frontline services” and reduce the number of quangos.
In July last year, communities secretary Eric Pickles questioned the role of audience development officers. This was followed in October by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport’s announcement that 19 of the 55 quangos it supported would be abolished or reformed. This included the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA), which will be incorporated into ACE by 1 October.
ACE has not only cut support for audience development agencies, but has turned down applications for national portfolio funding by other organisations that support the arts, most notably the Visual Arts and Galleries Association.
The decision to reduce the number of intermediate organisations that ACE supports is part of a strategy to focus funding on individual arts organisations, rather than those that provide support to them.
Creativity, Culture and Education, which delivered Creative Partnerships, had its funding cut in half by ACE last year. In its place, £10.5m of lottery money will be devoted each year to help the national portfolio organisations connect the work produced by arts bodies to communities and school.
ACE is also hoping to create a small number of “leadership” organisations that will take responsibility for the development of the arts. The idea is that individual arts organisations, rather than intermediate agencies, will spread expertise to those who have less resources and capacity.
Some intermediate agencies did gain national portfolio funding. These include the National Skills Academy Creative & Cultural, which oversees a network of training providers and employers that support the skills needs of the creative and cultural industries.
But overall, the idea of funding intermediate agencies has been rejected, and this is frustrating for those involved in areas such as audience development.
Audiences UK, a national network of audience development agencies, has argued that a blanket decision not to fund their work is hard to understand in the context of the priority ACE is giving to increasing and broadening audiences in its 10-year Achieving Great Art for Everyone strategy.
Audience development agencies say they provide effective and cheap ways to deliver broader and increased audiences for the arts. However, now the dust has settled since the ACE funding announcement, the future does not look entirely bleak for audience development agencies.
Arts council funding makes up about 20% of their income, and many have a range of revenue streams.
Moreover, Audiences UK says the ACE decision is not a vote of no confidence, more that ACE does not see regular funding as the best way to support this activity.
The arts council has said it will be looking into ways in which it can build on this work, albeit with a focus on programmes of activity and reduced overheads.
Audience development agencies will be able to apply for ACE’s £48m Grants for the Arts scheme, which is for project work. Unlike RFOs, national portfolio organisations will no longer be able to access this funding stream, which ACE says will free up £12m a year.
Audience development agencies are now hoping for clarity and direction as to how much money for audience development projects would be available under Grants for the Arts.
So what are the implications for museums, now that the functions of the MLA are being transferred to ACE? Understanding audiences and their needs is one of the areas of work that museums have made progress on in the past decade.
Much of this work has been carried out collaboratively, often through bodies that could be described as intermediate agencies.
Indeed, some museums have been working closely with arts council-funded audience development agencies. Many museums will be unwilling to see the networks that have sprung up to support this work threatened.
ACE funding at a glance
- A 29.6% cut to ACE 2011-2015 budget – 14.9% passed on to portfolio organisations.
- ACE received 1,333 applications to join the national portfolio, submitting bids for a total of £1.4bn.
- The available grant-in-aid budget for the portfolio for the same period was £950m.
- Of ACE’s current 849 regularly funded organisations, 791 chose to apply, and 585 were successful.
- Of the 542 new organisations that applied, 110 were successful.
- There will be 695 national portfolio holders.
