Seen any good plays lately? Spent a recent afternoon at a local museum or art gallery? How about an evening at the ballet? Of course you have. After all, artistic events are as ubiquitous as the artists who engage us. And the opportunities to bathe in Canadian culture grow more numerous with each passing year.
But what of philanthropy? How often does the average Canadian reach into her pocket and make a donation to a favourite arts organization? Does an evening of musical theatre end with a cheque or in-kind donation? Does a trip to the opera invite a completed donor card? And, if not, how are arts organizations expected to thrive when faced with a highly competitive and saturated funding pool and ever-diminishing public funds?
Artistic dollars and cents
If the most recent Canadian Survey on Giving, Volunteering and Participating (CSGVP) is any indication, donations to the arts rank extremely low on the list of donor priorities. While the recent survey includes a range of donor categories, the arts didn’t even make the cut. “Their proportion is generally too small to warrant mainstream analysis,” explains Mary Cromie of Statistics Canada. That’s understandable considering the tremendously high proportion of donor dollars that go elsewhere. With religious organizations claiming 45% of charitable contributions, health organizations coming next at 14%, (bringing in $1.2 billion dollars), and social services rounding out the top three with 10% or $903 million in donations, that doesn’t leave all that much room for Shakespeare in the park – or Chopin in the garden for that matter.
It should come as no surprise, then, that arts groups depend a lot on government dollars. Imagine Canada, in conjunction with Statistics Canada, came out with the National Survey of Nonprofit and Voluntary Organizations in 2004. It found that 28% of arts funding was derived from respective governmental bodies, while only 7% was gleaned from individual donations, 8% from corporate sponsorships or grants, and the remaining 57% acquired from earned income and other revenue sources.
The donor challenge
But with limited government funds, how do the arts carve out a monetary niche in such a saturated donor society? As opposed to health care and education, which have a grassroots appeal and the support of society’s big guns, arts organizations have had to learn to be creative and strategic in their quest for dollars, says George Stanois. “The difficulty with arts in Canada,” he explains, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, “is that we’re hockey-centric. If we could attach an arena to a gallery, we’d have no problem.” Stanois should know. As managing director of The Goldie Company – a fundraising consultancy that’s been around since 1965 – and a strong supporter of the arts in his own right, Stanois has helped numerous arts groups survive in Canada’s competitive landscape.
The National Ballet of Canada, a Toronto mainstay and an integral part of our Canadian heritage, is about as far away from hockey as one can get. It is estimated that 160,764 single tickets were sold last year resulting in more than $8 million at the box office and $5 million in fundraising revenues. But despite 25% of its total operating revenue coming from donations – monthly, major gifts and bequests – 47% from the box office, and 24% from government, the organization is still faced with a number of challenges in getting the funding they need. “There have been so many significant capital campaigns over the past few years that we need to reassert the needs of the National Ballet by putting a very strong case in front of our current ‘family’ of donors,” explains Diana Reitberger, director of development. In response, the ballet has learned to be more strategic in using their board and volunteers for prospect identification and cultivation. Another strategy involves “introducing and engaging new audiences to the art form and cultivating events that introduce them to our passionate circle of donors.”
Creative strategies
If larger arts groups such as the National Ballet face ongoing challenges in attracting donors and the funding they need, what of smaller organizations? According to Stanois, unless big in size and stature, arts organizations cannot stand alone in Canada. As a result, many look to partner with others or to create enhanced, value-added experiences for their prospective public and donors.
Enter Applause! Musicals Society, a Vancouver-based musical theatre company. Started in 1997 with a focus on performing lesser-known works of famous composers, such as George Gershwin, this arts group also bills itself as an educational and historical society. Run completely by volunteers, Applause operates solely on donations and ticket sales, currently sitting at 5% and 95% respectively. As for growth strategies, they include offering free events, developing a strong board, recruiting volunteers and establishing community partnerships. “I am a fan of partnering with other people and with other organizations that are mandated to do things that complement us,” says artistic producer Scott Ashton Swan. Current partners include the Vancouver Public Library and local historical societies like the Canadiana Historical Costume Society. Stanois would approve.
Value-adds and partnerships aside, many factors play a part in arts survival. Finally garnering charitable status this past year, Swan explains how offering tax receipts has affected their bottom line. “Even 5% is a huge increase because we are really getting 100% more donations than the year before.” And with approximately 4,000 tickets sold last season and revenues topping the $30,000 mark, Applause is carving out a strong and vibrant niche for itself within Vancouver’s arts community.
Donor evolution
But the Vancouver arts community – and others across Canada – are ever-changing and groups must ensure they can keep up. “I think donors are more willing to donate but are much more sophisticated in directing how they want their dollars spent,” explains Reitberger. Swan agrees. “Donors are becoming more savvy, asking more questions. People are more willing to donate money if they trust the organization and have proof of them doing what they say they would,” he adds. “And people see us as part of the community.”
Meaningful dollars
That communal feeling can make a big difference. In fact, demonstrating relevance and convincing donors their funds have meaning is another vital strategy employed by arts groups. Among those surveyed for the CSVGP, 89% said they gave because of their sense of compassion toward those in need, 86% wanted to support a cause they believed in, and 79% wanted to make a contribution to the community. Arts organizations would do well to try and fit in among these and other priorities. “They have to show that the whole community benefits from the arts,” states Stanois.
Take Alberta Theatre Projects (ATP), a thriving theatre company based in Calgary. An Ipsos-Reid study established that 64% of their audience members are younger to middle-aged, well-educated, with 56% earning incomes in excess of $50,000. ATP’s ticket sales and other earned income make up 33% of its finances, contributions from government account for 30%, and community support, philanthropic gifts from corporations and individuals and other sources make up the remaining 37%. Despite its higher-income audience and other funding sources, ATP’s biggest challenge, says Greg Epton, resource development director, is convincing the public of the inherent value of arts in helping to create a healthy, productive society. In fact, some very significant donors have discontinued their support in an effort to target other societal priorities such as health and education.
To build their case for support, ATP “makes an enduring contribution to the community by engaging in collaboration and mentorship, by offering a deeper appreciation to our existing audiences and by inviting, encouraging and educating new audiences.” As a result, donations have actually improved in the past few years. During the 2005/2006 season, for example, ATP was able to raise $495,000 in corporate sponsorships and foundation partnerships and achieved a 23% growth in individual philanthropic gifts. One such gift came in the form of an anonymous quarter-million-dollar donation.
Staying relevant is key
Establishing significance also plays a role in the strategic plan of the McMichael Gallery in Kleinburg Ontario. While government funding accounts for approximately 40% of its revenue, the gallery still relies on individual donations, tickets sales, special events and membership to keep its doors open. And though attendance, currently at 103,000, has dropped a bit since SARS, and donations of artwork are less prevalent than a decade ago (before legislative changes), cash and other means of funding are still on the rise. “I think the fact that the gallery bills itself as 100% Canadian and that we only show and reflect Canadian art makes us a really safe institution to donate to,” says director of communications Stephen Weir.
And since the average ticket holder is a 50-60 year-old educated female, partisanship can really go a long way. “As boomers get older, they have more time to be reflective about what Canada means to them,” Weir adds. When that happens, patriotic sensibilities are translated into donations of artwork and bequests. However, considering the growing multicultural community taking shape in Kleinburg and surrounding areas, Weir knows that challenges remain. “We have to learn to be meaningful to all Canadians,” he cautions. “Only if we’re successful, will donations go up, not down.”
Elisa Birnbaum is a freelance print and broadcast journalist living in Toronto.