Helen Jenkins, Facilitator – Go and See trip to Sheffield 7 January 2014

The first week back to work after the Christmas holidays can be a real drag.  All that time overindulging on food, family and friends is swapped for the hard reality of work plans and the daily commute.  Usually I find it hard to get myself motivated at this time of year.  But this year was different – my first day back at work was spent sharing knowledge and information with some of the most generous people and organisations possible; and it has made me vow to make sure that I share as much as I can this year with others too.

A big part of my role as facilitator for Making it Work was organising a ‘Go and See’ trip.  The purpose of ‘Go and See’ was to get together with organisations who could both challenge our thinking about fundraising and income generation for the arts and also to share knowledge and experience.  Finding a model of funding which works is a massive challenge for arts organisations in Stoke-on-Trent, and we knew we were not alone in this. We wanted to visit a city or region where the challenges we face would be understood and crucially where we may be able to find some solutions.

We choose to visit Sheffield after much debate and thought.  We wanted to visit somewhere of a similar size to Stoke-on-Trent, where there was thriving cultural industry and scene which had been born out of industrial decline.  We wanted to learn how the arts had thrived and what lessons we could take back to our own organisations and also to the region. Quite a tall order!

We choose Sheffield and on 7^th January a minibus set off from The Barracks en route across the hills to Sheffield, a beautiful but bumpy journey.  We had a packed schedule for the day and planned to meet our counterparts in a variety of organisations ranging from National Portfolio Funded galleries with vast experience of income generation to brand new organisations who had never embarked on any fundraising before.  We met with:

·         Site Gallery

·         Yorkshire Artspace

·         Bloc Projects

·         Access Space

·         Sheffield Printmakers

·         Music In the Round

It is hard to sum up the learning, as it was wide and varied.  For myself, the visit reinforced that every size of organisation is having to look at all of their income streams and then decide where and how to focus its resources to maximise income. What was clear was that many of the traditional sources of income, for example trusts and foundations, are being used more and more by arts organisations and I wonder how long this can be sustained.  It was fascinating to hear that some groups have decided to steer clear of Arts Council funding, citing stiff competition and the fact that the funding is largely restricted to projects as their reason.

Without exception there was huge generosity of spirit, time and knowledge from all of the people we met with in Sheffield.  We found issues similar to our own but also great spirit and will.  Of course we did not find the solution to our funding need, but then again we did not expect to, but we have made contacts that I hope will remain and grow.

Thank you to everyone we met – it was a fascinating and interesting day.  Please do come and make the journey to Stoke to see us soon!

Restoke – Go and See; 
Liam Evans-Ford - Creative Producer, Blood and Chocolate

We have begun our go and see’s starting with a trip to the picturesque city of York where we had heard rumours of a wonderful promenade performance with a cast of 200 community and professional performers called ‘Blood and Chocolate’ (http://www.pilot-theatre.com/?idno=1183) The performance was repeated over three weeks and sold out before the opening night (hence we never got to see it!). So we were interested in how the city embraced this participatory project and if there was any learning we could bring back to Stoke-on-Trent. 

We met with Liam Evans-Ford Creative Producer for Blood and Chocolate and based at Pilot Theatre.

Pilot Theatre initiated the project, having been established for over 30 years they primarily produce touring work with an emphasis of reaching young people. Pilot wanted to undertake a new project which connected with York, where the company is based, and tell a meaningful story for the city. As an NPO (National Portfolio Organisation) they receive regular arts council funding, and teamed up with 2 other NPOs to deliver this project (Slung Low and Theatre Royal). An interesting find about Pilot Theatre was their pioneering approach to technology, they have developed techniques in successfully streaming live performance and are now employed by both arts organisations and local authorities (to broadcast political events) which means they have been able to diversify their income streams.

Although working in a very different structure to Restoke, we were still interested in what can be achieved in the duration of a participatory projects. Successes in this particular project seemed to lie in Liam’s understanding of the local culture and community through having delivered large-scale community arts performance (he was also creative producer for York Mystery Plays in 2012). He puts success in private giving down to finding the ‘fit’ of a project with a business. Blood and Chocolate told a story of the Lord major sending Rowntree chocolate tins to York’s soldiers fighting in the war. This story, along with strong community engagement, meant they secured a donation from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) as well as additional income and support from a local chocolate themed attraction as well as a new independent chocolate house. 

There were many different levels of involvement, from enticing corporate packages to simple stickers in windows and a donation of £50 from businesses on the performance route. Incentives included logos on promotional material (including many bus sides) and acknowledgement in the souvenir brochure. It was noted that business and culture seem to be pretty intertwined here, with people from both sectors meeting and networking regularly allowing informal introductions of project ideas and partnership building. The engagement was a huge part of this and Liam acknowledges the huge culture of participation in arts projects in York. He puts this down to the tradition of the Mystery Plays, which would originally be acted out by the community and hosted by local businesses in a promenade procession through the city. This tradition seems to have stuck along with its appeal to local businesses. 

One of the most interesting things we learnt from Liam, however, was their attention to the skills of volunteers and participants who were catalysed to take on some of the challenges of marketing, building audiences and fundraising. This included teams of volunteer photographers documenting the process, people handing out flyers and manning sandwich boards during on site rehearsals and even the participants fundraising themselves for the project (eg. cake sales, ‘click through’ blogs and badge making!)

So this led us to think about the culture of participation in Stoke-on-Trent. We have had great success recently in gathering a cast of over 40 performers, not to mention crew and volunteers for our last project and for the arrival of the Olympic Torch in Stoke-on-Trent in 2012 our consortium cohorts B Arts paraded through the streets with over 1000 community performers! Not to mention the countless choirs, drama groups, dance schools and arts groups in the region…. so participation is well and truly alive here too!

Community is perhaps the real key for Restoke to connect to routes of private giving, both from individuals and local business. The participants in our work reach further out into the community than we ever could alone, offering important and real networks. With a bit of extra planning and foresight this resource (for want of a better word!) could be utilised in building our audiences, funding and impact. This potential in making the most out of the communities that come together through our work is something that really excites us, not only is it beneficial to the income of the project but also empowers the people involved and deepens the level of investment they have in the project.

We are already in the process of applying this knowledge to our work as we sit here writing a new funding bid, we’re taking a (small) leap in building private giving into our project which will see us experiment with some of the learning that ‘Making it Work’ has allowed us to explore. Fingers crossed!!

Creative Junctions…..

As part of PiCL’s go and see activity I went to see Creative Junction CIC. Founded in 2006/7, they were one of the first de-merged Creative Partnerships offices, with 12 staff at its busiest. 

After the demise of CP, they were also left having to look at how to generate all their income and although were successful in securing a range of funding from different sources it was no where near the same level.  

In the last 2/3 years they have managed to diversify their income stream and receive funding from a range from Local Authority commissions, small grants and corporate programmes and they are managing a relatively equal split between these income streams with commissioning being the slightly larger stream.

The programme I was most interested in and the reason for the visit was their programme with SEGRO, who sponsor a Young Artists programme, now in its third year. The relationship has developed over time and is a large piece of work for the organisation with showcases and exhibitions as well as the artists and work with young people.  The relationship has been built with SEGRO’s marketing department, which for me triggered ideas to consider on how PiCL’s offer to business will support their marketing activity as well as social responsibility strategies. One of my actions following this visit, is to spend time developing the approach we take when approaching companies and further consider how we frame our activity and projects.

I was interested to know if they would be trying to roll out the model, they were hoping to but had reservations about the right organisations to approach and that there was still a large bridge to be built between this type of programme and big corporations, who, despite having a presence in the area were more difficult to contact and work with. They feel that that medium sized locally rooted companies were more likely to engage however there is then the challenge of available funds and budgets.

One other bit of key learning for me was how flexible the organisation needs to be and to that they have become very entrepreneurial themselves and trying something new by approaching an ambitious programme with a social enterprise focus, partnering with organisations to promote and encourage learning and skills development that will aim to develop relationships with larger businesses in the area to deliver on these outcomes.

I felt acutely aware that PiCL have yet to grasp how commissioning could fit into PiCL’s future funding model and that I need to invest some time in building relationships with commissioners so they can see how we are able to deliver the projects and objectives,  things like young people led creative events and consultation. I also need to ensure PICL is in a position to tender or take up those opportunities as they arise.

My biggest reflection was that there wasn’t a magic formula and that PiCL are on the right track, trying to offer a range of ways in which people can engage with, buy from and support PiCL, but what we need as an organisation is more capacity to build relationships, get our offers and name out there further and shout about what we do and then actually ASK for the work and funding.

My next exploration will be into Arts and Business to see how they have supported organisations to develop their Arts based training model, see how those organisations are faring and if that learning can be implemented at PiCL.

Erica Love, Director. 

Total Transparency?
At the last consortium meeting we had a lively discussion about how much transparency we can, and should, display as small arts organisations. This got me thinking - well surely in the era of Freedom of Information and Wikileaks nothing less than total transparency will do.
Well, yes and no. As an organisation, I agree. As a charity and company limited by guarantee our accounts, trustees reports and board meetings are matters of public record. There is very little about the company that isn't either in the public domain or could be put there very easily. Any project that has received public funds in turn makes our reports publicly available (eg via FOI requests).
But I would draw a distinction between information on the company and information on individuals. Our annual accounts show total salary bill, not what each person earns. What we paid each individual artist who worked for the company is likewise aggregated.
And I'm not sure I'd like to see a 'see salaries' button on our website. We support a lot of emerging artists and early career professionals. They go on and use our name, quite rightly, in securing future work. They probably over-achieved and were underpaid in the work they did, I'm certainly happy for them to present what they did for us in the best possible light.
Likewise, I would like to present myself and the work of the company in the best possible light to potential funders and partners. It's part of my job to get doors opened to senior people in the public sector. They are usually paid more than I am, and when they go our website to look at our work I wouldn't like what I earn to be necessarily one of the first things they see.
Trevelyan Wright, Executive Director.

bITjAM - What can we learn from the last 18 years of Lottery Funding in Stoke on Trent?

I thought it would be useful to examine lottery funding data spanning back to the heady days of 1995 to get a sense of the successful grants and also get a sense of the type of work that lottery funding used to support. I'm not quite sure how this data fits into helping Arts Organisations moving forward with seeking new ways of generating funds for projects; I'm open to ideas.

Using the Lottery section of the Culture website and searching for Stoke on Trent reveals around 18 years of data which reveals 1223 projects totalling £117,872,724.

Now I thought it would be best to ask a range of questions against this data including:

• Which organisations got what amounts?
• Which types of projects were successful?
• Who funded the projects?
• What was the pattern of funding over time?
• What are the key phrases that repeat in the project descriptions?

The data is not complete as a number of organisations may have selected to keep their funding application confidential so we have to take that into account.

The charts below show some of the data in visual form using Google Charts (it's quick and simple once I completed a little analysis). I also used a few extra tools up my sleeve to link Company names in the list to Companies house to get a sense of the types of company formations involved (Limited by Shares, CiC etc). I've also ran the project descriptions through a little analysis to get a sense of keywords that get repeated in the project titles, I looked for Named Entities rather than the usual word frequency (the type you see in Wordles). This analysis reveals a little more about the meaning of the high frequency words/phrases in the text .

It's up for grabs what we learn from this data, for me the named entities has been insightful however there's more analysis to be done, what can you find? How can we use data like this to move forward?

Here's the link to full data.

Funding over time:

(There were approx 961 awards given to groups with no formal structure recognised in Companies house although company names may have changed, but NOT 961 individual groups, just awards, some groups were awarded more than once. Data to be further analysed)

Restoke – Trepidations

We have now sat round several tables at our fellow arts organisation’s bases, discussing our collective futures and the impact of our development on the wider community of Stoke-on-Trent. This alone is a rare act, and we are both excited and humbled to be in the company of some great creative minds to be addressing the contentious issues of funding, as part of this consortium.

Restoke have been lucky to have been funded over several projects by Arts Council England, matched by support from local authorities and other public funding streams, and now through this Catalyst programme been given this opportunity to ‘Make it Work’ in terms of building our fundraising capacity. This programme coincides of course with huge cuts to subsidised art and a push for us to “hammer home the value of culture to our economy” (Maria Miller, Culture Secretary) But what does this mean for organisations, like Restoke, who work outside of commercially attractive settings?

Restoke are nomads, we are three separate artists, we have our own individual work and agendas, we disperse, we come together, we feel this makes us stronger. We don’t have a base, we don’t have overheads or staff, any time that we invest in Restoke outside of our projects is usually unpaid. But we know why we are here and we look towards a better future for Stoke-on-Trent…. However, we want to be a part of this bright vision and for that we need to be stronger and more resilient to further cuts in government funding.

We usually work site-specifically, in old/redundant/cold/outdoor spaces, we beg borrow and steal (shhh) spaces to rehearse in and often end up hugely indebted to the people and places that help us with this task.

We must admit, looking to diversify funding streams with an emphasis on private giving feels like a giant leap, and we are not without reservations. We struggle to see how our work, which is often socially driven, can become attractive to private investors. We wonder how much time we can give up to the pursuit of this alternative funding. How much time should we be taking away from our artistic practice and development. When do artists get to just BE artists?

Luckily we have been granted this opportunity and time through the Catalyst programme to investigate this. The ‘Go and See’ phase that we are about to embark on will hopefully unearth some current practices and success (or unsuccessful) stories that we can learn from and adapt to our organisation(s).

We do not know what the outcomes of even this first phase will look like, but what we do know if that we’ll be more knowledgeable, and we look forward to sharing that knowledge both within the consortium and beyond, seeking out what could work in our city… This is exciting, but it’s also serious, it’s about survival after all.

Making it Work...for PiCL

Sitting down to contribute to the blog I started to reflect on where PiCL came from, what we've done and where we want to go.

It seems a long time ago that a fresh faced and excited new team took on the task of delivering the Creative Partnerships programme in Stoke on Trent, however it was only 8 years ago.

In 2009 when PiCL was formed, our vision was to carry on delivering the CP programme, but also branch out into other areas, form new and different partnerships that would eventually diversify our funding base.

This challenge was one we didn't quite conquer. Thinking about it, what a task that was always going to be, moving from funder of creative programmes with an income of over £800,000, to an organisation seeking funding. How can you completely transform your offer from giving money to support delivery, into something people would want to buy, or at least to buy into ?

These are the questions PiCL are still facing now and why the Making it Work consortium is so vital to us and the future. Working alongside these exceptional arts organisations, it is exciting to embark on unpicking exactly how you build sustainable organisations, find new and innovative ways of funding them, how do we communicate what we do and more importantly how to we build the capacity of the organisations so they don't just survive, but thrive and grow?

As a consortium of organisations we have all been used to coming up with fresh and exciting projects. How can we, with the time and support that the Catalyst funding provides and using our collective creative heads find new solutions to our funding needs?

Our first task is to 'Go and See', so we will be donning our hats and coats and heading off to check out other people and places that are getting it right, remembering it is important we ask the right questions.

• What are the similarities, what are the differences?
• How might this work in our context and specifically Stoke/North Staffs?
• Is it something we want to do ? 
• How long did it take ?
• What resources did they need?
• What help did they have ?
• What didn't work, what mistakes can we learn from ? 

As we put our best foot forward at the start of this process,  it feels good to know that although we are looking for what works for each of the organisations, we are on a learning journey together and not just those involved in the consortium but as a wider sector in North Staffordshire. 

Making It Work - Identifying Research Strategies and Sponsorship Funding Possibilities

After a few months of setting the consortium up, getting comfortable with each other, making appointments and filling positions, it felt like at this week's meeting, the Making It Work Consortium got down to the serious business of delving into the vexed area of alternative, non-central arts funding.

Hosted by B-Arts,  under the guidance of our newly appointed facilitator, Helen Jenkins, and with the aid of soup and cake, we explored Phase 1 of the two year programme - The Go and See Visits. Proper and effective research is at the heart of any new learning, and so each of the consortium members laid out their initial thoughts on which area they would like to concentrate the first round of research visits.

As something of a broad church of a consortium, made up of interests ranging from participatory arts, contemporary dance, arts and education, digital arts and conceptual visual arts, inevitably, we came up with a series of places of specific concern to each group. In broader terms though some interesting areas were covered.

• the worth of visiting organisations operating in similar spheres in order to gain a broader understanding of and to assess the funding situation across the country. 
• to avoid excluding research in to how much-larger organisations have developed their funding capacities.
• to research geographically diverse examples
• but to be aware of the potential irrelevance of some research to our own situation specifically in Stoke-on-Trent.

Narrowing down from this, we also talked about specific funding issues to address. 

• How to operate without a base building - how does this effect funding capability.
• Which/Who are the most effective arts organisations at making money.
• Beyond Ticket Sales, what are the most effective ways for arts organisations of making money
• how effective are membership schemes

We moved on to look at the rich and powerful in the city to identify possible sponsor-streams. From multi-millionaires such as Bet 365's Coates family, Mobile Phone magnate John Cauldwell and Stoke's Secret Millionaire Mo Chaudrey to the big corporations, employers, charities and organisations.

It led us to a really interesting list of the top 100 companies in Stoke-on-Trent, in terms of turnover and profit. It's fascinating for us to see who's on this list, and a great start to identifying possible sponsors and donors for the city's arts activities. 

Our next step, with the help of our facilitator will be to strategise and target our research visits for maximum individual and group benefit, but maybe also to identify the best methods of approach to some of these companies. Do they fund the arts? If so, how and to what extent? what are the benefits for them in funding the Arts? And. What are the most effective ways for arts organisations to approach such organisations.

AirSpace Gallery - What's Next?

The first stage of the Catalyst process from our point of view is research. Our consortium has an imminent meeting at which we are tasked with identifying the target of some research visits.

We need to find out and understand what the financial and funding situation is with other similar organisations - that is to say artist-led spaces operating on a non-commercial, not-for-profit basis.

We need to ask some basic questions, find some common ground and analyse and test the responses and answers to see if we can apply any new ideas to our model.

• Who are these organisations?
• Where are these organisations?
• How do these organisations operate?
• How do these organisations fund themselves?
• What non-centrally funded initiatives have they tried and which have proved successful.?
• Can financial stability be assured through a formal union of similar spaces?

In recent weeks, the artist-led scene has seen the emergence of a loose form of union. Artist and member of The Royal Standard, Kevin Hunt has produced a list of 100 of the country's artist-led spaces, which is a great place to start for us.

At this stage, we envisage trying to visit each space, either in person or electronically - to get a sense of the spaces, how they work and how they make them pay. This would be produced as an artwork in itself, with the findings disseminated to each organisation on the list. Beyond this, we think there might be a discussion as to whether a more formal collective union might help improve the individual financial plight of each organisation.

Knowledge Shared is Knowledge Doubled.

Five arts organisations based, and working in, Stoke and North Staffordshire: B arts, AirSpace Gallery, biTjaM, PiCL (Partners In Creative Learning) and Restoke, have received support from Arts Council England’s Catalyst Arts : building fundraising capacity award, to work together over the next eighteen months.

Our aim for Making It Work is to develop the experience, tools and strategies to break the cycle of chasing the same funding streams that we are, in different ways, locked into.
The organisations cover a range of art-forms including; visual art, dance, participatory arts, music, digital and combined arts. We engage with people as artists, participants and audiences locally, nationally and internationally. 

The organisations in the consortium have extensive experience in raising funds from well-trodden routes: lottery distributors, ACE grants, trusts and charities. Some also have experience of generating direct income through ticket sales, tender awards and marketing of goods or services.

Catalyst is a £100 million culture sector wide private giving investment scheme aimed at helping cultural organisations diversify their income streams and access more funding from private sources. The scheme is made up of investment from Arts Council England, Heritage Lottery Fund and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). Catalyst offers organisations the opportunity to move their fundraising and development expertise on to the next level, whatever their current starting point. Through all strands of the Catalyst initiative, we aim to support creative and innovative activity that will test a range of fundraising approaches. The £7 million Catalyst Arts: building fundraising capacity scheme aims to enable arts organisations with an underdeveloped fundraising model to increase capacity and expertise in this area and improve their resilience. In the long-term, organisations will be better able to embed new business models that increase and diversify their income to deliver great art for everyone. We received 164 applications to the scheme and have awarded grants of between £60,000 and £150,000 to 62 consortia. These grants will benefit 217 organisations.
The scheme supports organisations to work together collectively and collaboratively to develop innovative and efficient solutions to addressing fundraising development needs. We believe that learning and skills will be embedded and reach more organisations if collaboration is at the heart of this scheme. The scheme is designed to help organisations with little or no experience of fundraising to:• build capacity to address both shared and individual fundraising development needs of cluster members• identify and develop effective fundraising models that have a long term impact on the business model of each organisation