Who's really benefiting from fundraising for arts presenters? In many cases its educational and outreach programs which need and deserve contributed funds to operate. But quite often, contributed funds and endowment dollars are used to subsidize ticket prices. With 80% of the audience for the performing arts making much more than the average American, is it really about need or something else?
On average about 55% of revenues are generated through earned income (ticket sales, ad revenue, concessions, rentals), the other 45% is contributed income (Hager and Pollack, 2002). On the expense side there are many factors that go into the cost of presenting including artist fees, marketing, ticketing, labor and facilities. Artist fees represent on average 40%, management/facilities costs 23%, direct production costs 11%, marketing 9%, and fundraising 3%. Actual percentage of expenses vary greatly from presenter to presenter and may provide insight to who is actually benefiting from contributed dollars. In many cases, its the donors themselves.
A study by 14 Major Universities (Wolf/Brown, 2007) gives some insight as to why donors contribute. Almost half (46%) are driven by self interest, i.e., opportunities to network with others or be publicly recognized for their contribution. Another 21% have "a desire to expand the reach of the arts to children and the disadvantaged."The remaining 33% have an affinity for the intrinsic value of the art itself. This to, varies greatly from presenter to presenter. In total, individual contributions represent about 46% of contributed income, governments providing 9.5% and foundations another 18%.
Ciara Presseler's post for Fractured Atlas comments on profitability in the arts, reaction to her comments are informative. Combined with issues of agency in the arts and commercial and non-commercial interests, a very complex and potentially corrupt ecosystem emerges. Often the exchanges of dollars and services have little to do with the stated mission of the organization, but more to do with the relationships between board members, civic leaders, businesses, unions and funding agencies promoting their own self interest.
Unfortunately, inefficiency has become far too common in our organizations and is hidden by code words like public good, community building, and arts access. It's an issue of transparency. We are better than that, especially if our missions are really worth pursuing.
