Author: Levinson, Nan S.

Publication Year: 1979

Media Type: Report

Summary:

This report reviews the activities of the Partnership Consultations Project, particularly in regards to funding practices on the federal and state levels. The process of defining and structuring the Partnership Consultations project was an evolutionary one combining suggestions and responses from those in public arts agencies and discussion with others working in related activities with pertinent readings. It developed over a two-year period, during which time major changes occurred at the Endowment and within state arts agencies.

Abstract:

This report reviews the activities of the Partnership Consultations Project, particularly in regards to funding practices on the federal and state levels. The process of defining and structuring the Partnership Consultations project was an evolutionary one combining suggestions and responses from those in public arts agencies and discussion with others working in related activities with pertinent readings. It developed over a two-year period, during which time major changes occurred at the Endowment and within state arts agencies.

In August 1977, the National Council on the Arts received a report from the Federal-State Partnership documenting a process known as the Reassessment, which had aimed at determining how the Partnership Office could respond to the needs and desires of the state arts agencies most effectively. Among the recommendations in the report was one to establish evaluation procedures for purposes of accountability.

Over the following several months, the Federal-State Panel, its subcommittees, and the staff worked with SAA's to develop and refine systems for allocation of funds and delivery of services. In this deliberation, two often-voiced needs were for more information and a clearer understanding of what was happening with public dollars on both the federal and state levels.

In the summer of 1978, the Partnership Office changed its method of grantmaking from one based on competition for funds to one in which amounts for which states were eligible were determined by a formula based on population size and level of legislatively appropriated funds. Since quality of service was not a factor that could be fully reflected in the formula or through written state plan applications, the panel and staff, in consultation with the field, set out to find alternate methods of assessment and review. (p.1)

CONTENTS
1. Introduction.

A. Background of the project. 
B. Guidance.

2. Preparation. 

A. Project design.
B. Recruitment of participants. 
C. Orientation. 
D. Consultants. 
E. Preparation for visits.

3. Process. 

A. Self-assessment.
B. Visits. 
    1. Alaska State Council on the Arts. 
    2. Michigan Arts Council. 
    3. Alabama State Council on the Arts and Humanities. 
    4. South Dakota Arts Council. 

4. Findings and analysis. 

A. Conceptual framework. 
B. Policy. 
C. Programming.
    1. Grantmaking.
    2. Services.
    3. Programs and clients.

5. Evaluation. 

A. Processes.
    1. Planning
    2. Communication.
    3. Advocacy. 
B. Management.

6. Summary.

Appendices:
     A. 1979-80 schedule.
     B. Project abstract.
     C. Self-assessment outline.
     D. Consultation schedule.
     E. Model team visit schedule.

Arts & Intersections:

Categories: Funding