Created as part of final project for Urban Affairs Capstone, Hunter College Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, Summer 2011. Department of Cultural Affairs was fictional client.

1. Department of Cultural Affairs, City of New York Funding the Theatre of New York City

2. Report Outline Problem Statement Recommendations Major Findings Context History and Economic Impact Financials Solutions Status quo Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Other alternatives Final recommendations

3. Problem Statement The New York City Department of Cultural Affairs does not allocate its resources in a manner that allows universal access among the theatres in New York City.

4. Recommendations Rotate funding for city-owned institutions biennially, funneling remaining funding towards smaller theatres Target funding to new playwrights and composers, and theatres hoping to commission work

5. Major Findings Theatre receives large proportion of DCA funds Money still overwhelmingly targeted to institutions in Manhattan Respondents in NYFA report identified distance/location/travel as barrier to participation in cultural events Institutions eligible for multiyear grants dominate funding City-owned institutions exempt from funding policies

6. Context: History & Economic Impact “The American policy approach is to keep the government small and outsource as many programs and duties as possible into non-government institutions.” Shows on Broadway grossed over $1 billion during 2009-2010 season Tourism from theatre contributes significantly to local hotels, restaurants and other businesses Expanding support to outer boroughs would boost BIDs and commercial districts surrounding theatres Improvements around BAM in recent years

7. Context: Financials Source: New York Foundation for the Arts

8. Context: Financials Source: New York City Independent Budget Office

9. Context: Financials Source: New York City Independent Budget Office

10. Solutions: Status Quo Funding priorities include Programs for culturally underserved populations Maintenance and subsidies of low admission prices Creation of new work and/or restoration of existing work Range of grants Operating income <$250,000: $5,000 to $50,000 Operating income >$250,000: $15,000 to $300,000 Organizations eligible for multiyear award

11. Solutions: Status QuoCity-Owned Institutions

12. Solutions: Status QuoAnalysis 33 City-owned institutions exempt from funding policies 6 City-owned institutions offer theatre programming Multiyear grants account for 33% of total funding Elimination of line-item funding pattern leveled playing field for non line-item organizations Manhattan favored heavily over other boroughs Peer-panel review system & competitive grants work with applicants at the borough level

13. Solutions: Alternative 1Rotate Funding of City-Owned Institutions Group institutions into two or three groups and rotate biennially Keep funding of each group steady Arrange organizations in group so remaining funds are steady Funnel remaining funds towards smaller theatres

14. Solutions: Alternative 1Analysis Alleviates dominance of city-owned institutions Larger organizations may have more foundation and individual donor support Steady stream of remaining funds allows for sustainability among organizations Reaction from city-owned institutions Number of groups Period of time spent without city funding

15. Solutions: Alternative 2Target Funding to Cultivate New Works Establish competitive grants specifically encouraging development of new works Individual fellowships for playwrights and composers Funding for theatres hoping to commission new work Consider reducing capital support Look to foundations for models and/or partnerships Harold and Mimi Steinberg Charitable Trust 1971 Rockefeller Foundation report identifying group of theatrical entrepreneurs

16. Solutions: Alternative 2Analysis It has “become harder and harder to raise money for the one thing that the theater is supposed to be doing – which is new productions.” Benefits of competitive grants open to all institutions Allows larger theatres with tradition of encouraging new works access to funds Government agencies previously criticized for being “art cop” Possibility of negative reaction from theatres previously benefitting from generous capital support

17. Solutions: Other AlternativesOverview and Analysis Increased funding Not economically feasible Theatre already takes 2nd largest share of DCA funding Partnership with corporations with a history of supporting cultural events Willingness to sponsor controversial works Willingness of non-profits to partner with corporations Partnership with commercial producers to support smaller theatres How far would Disney go? Willingness of non-profits to partner with Disney and other commercial producers

18. Final Recommendations A combination of alternatives 1 and 2, working within budget, would address most fiscal and artistic needs Reevaluate practice of multiyear grants Work with directors of city-owned institutions to determine best patterns for rotating funding Consider round table or panel discussions with leaders of all non-profit theatres to understand and meet unique funding needs