Today marks the end of my third year at the Council and the start of my fourth. According to some lists, that makes me the third longest serving ED in the Council’s history. Something of an achievement I suppose.
Being an “anniversary” it provides an opportunity to look back over these last three years and remark (to myself) on the changes and progress that’s been made. Are there some highlights you might ask? Sure, plenty, but the things I’m most happy with are not what you might expect. #1 Achievement – Stability. The Council has a Governance, is fiscally sound, and has a Strategic Plan (as of last night – April 01 is the date for the public release).
You just can’t build a thing on a foundation that is shaky or insufficiently strong as to support a growing structure. Now, on the cusp of my fourth year, I am satisfied that the work that needed to be done to build, or rebuild a solid foundation for this organization is largely complete. Sure, there are still some issues here and there, the Bylaws need an update. But on the whole, I’m happy. PEI and the PEI Council of the Arts has provided me with a challenging, and rewarding three years, and I’m looking forward to a few more.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Friday, March 9, 2007
So Close
This Tuesday evening, our Board of Directors will consider, for final approval, a strategic plan to govern our activities for the next three years. This comes, of course, after nearly a full year of “consultation”. Indeed, the Council is nearing the point where it must choose to respond, or face oblivion at the hands of irrelevance.
While undertaking such extensive consultation is wearing on staff and resources, I can’t dismiss the value of the results. I also must remark on the subsidiary value of making the process so open and comprehensive.
To be as inclusive as possible, and for those who may not know what we did, we:
Considering that this is an Island of less than 140,000 people on about 2000 square kilometers (Greater Toronto covers about 7000 km2) that’s a pretty extensive set of meetings.
I have no doubt that any new plan that departs from the status quo for us will garner its fair share of detractors. We understood that even before we began, and that had a great deal to do with the depth of the process – the times and mechanisms for input were many and often.
Now, we’re on the threshold of building support for the plan. How best to do that? Online tools make it easy but can lack credibility for “traditional” recipients. E-petitions are gaining in use and popularity. We’ve considered a perforated, postage paid, post card included in the Strategic Plan itself – that’s a costly option. We know that real letters and direct phone calls have the greatest impact, but I’m never convinced that people follow through.
Assuming that you would support that plan, what could we do that would most inspire you to take action? How can we make it easy enough for you that you would do it? Write me and tell me.
While undertaking such extensive consultation is wearing on staff and resources, I can’t dismiss the value of the results. I also must remark on the subsidiary value of making the process so open and comprehensive.
To be as inclusive as possible, and for those who may not know what we did, we:
- Conducted 14 community consultations open the members, the arts community, and the general public
- Consulted approximately 1/3 of the Islands MLAs
- Invited by letter direct submissions from our membership
- Consulted with the relevant staff of the Department of Community and Cultural Affairs
- Consulted with each of the four active regional arts councils
Considering that this is an Island of less than 140,000 people on about 2000 square kilometers (Greater Toronto covers about 7000 km2) that’s a pretty extensive set of meetings.
I have no doubt that any new plan that departs from the status quo for us will garner its fair share of detractors. We understood that even before we began, and that had a great deal to do with the depth of the process – the times and mechanisms for input were many and often.
Now, we’re on the threshold of building support for the plan. How best to do that? Online tools make it easy but can lack credibility for “traditional” recipients. E-petitions are gaining in use and popularity. We’ve considered a perforated, postage paid, post card included in the Strategic Plan itself – that’s a costly option. We know that real letters and direct phone calls have the greatest impact, but I’m never convinced that people follow through.
Assuming that you would support that plan, what could we do that would most inspire you to take action? How can we make it easy enough for you that you would do it? Write me and tell me.
Thursday, March 1, 2007
From Red Tape to Clear Results
The Report of the Independent Blue Ribbon Panel on Grant and Contribution Programs
This report should be of great interest to anyone in the arts and culture, on either side of the funding table. While the report covers all types of programs delivered by the Federal Government, certain sections certainly rang true for me. I’d like to draw everyone’s attention to the General Recommendations section which states (on page viii of the complete report):
There are a number of issues raised and solutions offered in this lengthy document (142 pages in the PDF file) but, for those of us in the funding business, all are worthy of consideration. When I consider that the need for multi-year funding was a consistent issue from Island arts organizations, I was struck by the relevance of this paragraph:
Further, regarding Core funding, the panel had this to say:
Given that a heightened advocacy role is a likely priority in the upcoming strategic plan, this document provides and excellent base of knowledge, from an impeccable panel, that is in support of some important goals.
If you’d like to read the full report, you can enter the Blue Ribbon Panel’s website here:
http://www.brp-gde.ca/
Follow the left sidebar link to “Report” and you’ll find the links to the PDF reports at the bottom of the page.
While these recommendations were intended for the Federal government, I think all funders, in all sectors, can find useable, implementable recommendations to put in to practice.
This report should be of great interest to anyone in the arts and culture, on either side of the funding table. While the report covers all types of programs delivered by the Federal Government, certain sections certainly rang true for me. I’d like to draw everyone’s attention to the General Recommendations section which states (on page viii of the complete report):
“The essence of our recommendations can be distilled into four simple proposals to government:
1) Respect the recipients—they are partners in a shared public purpose. Grant and contribution programs should be citizen-focussed. The programs should be made accessible, understandable and useable.
2) Dramatically simplify the reporting and accountability regime—it should reflect the circumstances and capacities of recipients and the real needs of the government and Parliament.
3) Encourage innovation—the goal of grant and contribution programs is not to eliminate errors but to achieve results, and that requires a sensible regime of risk management and performance reporting.
4) Organize information so that it serves recipients and program managers alike.”
There are a number of issues raised and solutions offered in this lengthy document (142 pages in the PDF file) but, for those of us in the funding business, all are worthy of consideration. When I consider that the need for multi-year funding was a consistent issue from Island arts organizations, I was struck by the relevance of this paragraph:
“The panel suspects that this practice of annual renewals is intended to add a level of control over multi-year projects. In the panel’s view, however, this approach is misguided. Where the project or activity to be funded is multi-year in nature, the funding profile should match it to the extent possible (at a minimum for a three-year duration).
This is subject of course to possible mid-course correction, but these considerations do not detract from the need to provide multi-year funding in these cases, as indeed several
departments do already.” – page 26
Further, regarding Core funding, the panel had this to say:
“Recommendation
15) The Treasury Board should encourage funding departments and agencies to revisit the issue of whether and under what circumstances core funding is warranted to supplement project-specific funding.” – page 28
Given that a heightened advocacy role is a likely priority in the upcoming strategic plan, this document provides and excellent base of knowledge, from an impeccable panel, that is in support of some important goals.
If you’d like to read the full report, you can enter the Blue Ribbon Panel’s website here:
http://www.brp-gde.ca/
Follow the left sidebar link to “Report” and you’ll find the links to the PDF reports at the bottom of the page.
While these recommendations were intended for the Federal government, I think all funders, in all sectors, can find useable, implementable recommendations to put in to practice.
Posts
