Funding, the arts, and balance.

Posted on by

Leafing through the weekend papers, there’s a lot of reporting going on of the Arts Council cuts in funding, and how they are affecting arts organisations in different ways. Admittedly, the bleeding-heart liberal, left-leaning, cappuccino–supping papers I read are arguably more likely to cover theatre types getting angry, but coverage on the whole shebang, on legal threats, on literature translation, and much more seems quite a lot over the course of two or three days. Where was the media when the Community Champions fund, one of the few providing grassroots support to individual community activists, was ditched? [the CC fund provided up to £2000 to over 10,000 people and had a pretty impressive record of outcomes and impact too].

The message also seems confused: one article lambasted the amount spent on opera, whilst another pointed out how a regional opera company was having its funding cut as an example of a poor decision. Ultimately, you have to feel some sympathy with the funders: their overall funding is increasingly constricted (falling lottery sales + Olympics), and there are often no "right" answers in these cases. Whilst calls for ‘arts’ people to run these funds have some validity, the nuts and bolts of effective grant-giving is as much about measurement, monitoring and administration as about informed decision-making.

Clearly, the process could have gone better (pre-Xmas with little response time) and could, possibly, have been more transparent. But the coverage has seemed quite unbalanced. This article, for example, with the calming title of "the final reckoning", details 6 arts organisations facing cuts. All worthy ca(u)ses, particularly the two theatres, it would seem to me. But none facing extinction, and some facing a reduction of around a fifth or sixth of their annual budget: substantial, but how many third sector organisations enter a financial year with all their funding and budget secured? Indeed, the experiences of these arts organisations will chime with many in the third sector….though the amount of coverage / campaigning in the media is markedly different. And where is the coverage of the organisations (700+) receiving an increase in funding from March, and the details of what greater impact they can now have?

From an SSE point of view, it’s clear that this could affect students and Fellows who work in the arts sphere, of whom there are quite a few. On the other hand, several current students in London, and (shortly) in Liverpool and East Midlands have places funded by a programme which is supported (amongst others) by the Arts Council. Crucial support at a key stage of their journey in changing people’s lives through the arts.

Swings, as they say, and roundabouts: and no black and white answers.

Is Social Enterprise applicable in academic institutions?

Posted on by

After my first full week with the SSE and in the
UK, I think I am starting to grasp the basics of both. It took me a while to
get used to the light switch, the traffic system and the British slang, but
it’s amazing how quickly one adapts to a new environment. In my first week here
at the office I’ve been trying to get a sense of the SE sector by poking around
on the web and working on different projects for the network team. At first I
was a bit overwhelmed by all the different companies, names, terms and slang,
but it’s starting to sink in gradually .

One of the things I’ve been working on is the Social Enterprise
Ambassadors programme
, led by SEC and assisted by a
consortium of different organisations, including of course, SSE. It’s been
very interesting to read about the very inspiring  individuals that make
up the ambassadors group and I very much look forward to meeting them at a
training session towards the end of my stay in London.

Although the SE Ambassadors are amazing people, and have been chosen to promote the
movement, what’s been inspiring  to me so far is my
encounters and interaction with the students and  Fellows
of SSE. While social change was an abstract term to me at school, my meetings
with these people have shown me that change doesn’t occur in the abstract or (necessarily) on
the macro level, it happens in our local communities, mostly at a smaller scale.
My challenge in the months to come is to figure out a way to bridge such
practical solutions with an abstract learning model that will work for my college back in Minnesota. SSE programmes are very much about learning, rather
than teaching…and focused on the practical and personal, rather than the
academic and generic.

Since I’ve also learned that much of the conversation
about  social  change indeed occurs through blogging I
would love any input /responses to this question:

How can Social Enterprise/Innovation/Entrepreneurship be taught in an academic setting?

 

Social entrepreneur round-up: BBBC, Fast Company, Independent

Posted on by

A few things of direct relevance to the blog have cropped up over the last few days that might be of interest.

– First up, Andrew Mawson, founder of the Bromley By Bow Centre, has written a book (The Social Entrepreneur) which was excerpted in the Guardian this morning, and commented on in their blog; his forthright comments about the failings of politicians and what he would do instead (give £3m to Alan Sugar, for example) make interesting reading….

– Secondly, Fast Company, the US business magazine have announced their 2008 Social Capitalist Awards….which involves them adding some new ones to ones they’ve announced previously…45 social entrepreneurs and enterprises now. Worth checking out.

– Finally, the Independent has been working with Schwab and Boston Consulting Group on their Social Entrepreneur of the Year award (which the Schwab foundation do in many other countries around the world). The shortlist is announced here and replicated here on this blog, where I also responded to the post in the comments (about whether it is needed / how well the UK is served etc.) Some well-known names here: Eden, Belu, the Hub, but good to see some less well known ones also, especially Eric Samuels at Community Food Enterprise. I know that Schwab has canvassed widely in the UK amongst its networks (including with SSE), so will be interesting to read/hear more about it. The SSE blog will be attending the awards event next week, so will report back then.

GenY: The future of Social Enterprise?

Posted on by

It seems that the job market is approaching a generational crossroads. Rosetta Thurman  reports that the idealistic baby boomers that once started the non-profits that
blossom today are leaving their jobs to retirement. But who is going to replace
them? Generation Y perhaps? (The Internet generation, born roughly between 1976-2000).
They are young, ambitious, highly selective and are now gradually entering the
job market for the first time.

In China, at least 550 million people fit the profile,
almost double the entire U.S. population. In America however, Generation Y
number about 70 million, still a sizable group. Recent news reports from the
Iowa Caucuses indicate that these youngsters are a
force to recognize,
virtually handing Barack Obama the momentum in the U.S. presidential race.
These echo boomers are techno sawy, they demand change, they are financially smart and they want
to make a difference from day one. At a glance it may seem that the growth of
social enterprises and entrepreneurship should explode any day now, and I
admit, the environment is ripe for harvest. It seems though that the harvesters
are sleeping and unless they act on the momentum the Gen Yers will shift their
attention somewhere else.

Idealism is no longer a word only associated with hippies
and environmentalists but rather a powerful influence on today’s youth.
However, idealism by itself normally does not survive the transition into adult
life unless it becomes real. It is kind of like believing in Santa Claus down at
the local mall; one day your bound to catch him during a smoke break in the
back alley. For many young people, idealism works the same way. You grow up and
realize that it was all a scam and that you cannot matter or make change in the
big picture.

In our day and age, secondary schooling normally work as
this wake-up call. For hours on end I learned about hunger and drought, the
AIDS epidemic, war and terror, ethnic strife, climate change and poverty. At
first I was determined to fix it all, until one day I gave up, thinking I
couldn’t do anything that would make a difference. In schools, students are
shown the big picture but never the solutions, which are almost always small
and local. Schools should of course continue to teach reality, but someone has
to show young people that there are solutions – and that’s where the third
sector comes in!


I am lucky to intern at SSE where I get to witness first-hand the many local solutions that exist. The
social sector has the potential to grow immensely now that GenY is growing up,
but only if it provides opportunities for idealism to continue to exist in today’s
brutal reality. The sector must reach out to GenY and show young idealists that
solutions are real, and many. The first step in this process should be to
transform idealism from an abstract term into tangible, visible and practical
examples. Luckily for us, idealism doesn’t take smoke breaks and doesn’t wear a
fake beard. The question remains however, how can the sector reach out to the younger generation, now ready to enter the job market?

Transparency and giving well….

Posted on by

Regular readers will know that I often cite the delivery, quality, transparency mantra as important foundations for any socially-beneficial enterprise seeking to operate in today’s world/markets. Two of those, quality (including measurement) and transparency, have collided in a huge furore over a US-based philanthropic funder/evaluator called GiveWell. You know when the founder of an organisation has to title a blog post "I had a lapse in judgement, did a horrible thing, and I apologize", that things are not good.

Basically, one of GiveWell’s founders was caught asking himself a question (with a fake ID), then responding (with another ID) promoting GiveWell. He was also subsequently tracked using various aliases to promote GiveWell elsewhere online and, according to some posts, give their competitors a kicking. Not good, particularly when the organisation has shouted from the rooftops about the need for transparency and openness. This has made the reaction (see GiftHub and the original Metafilter post for the gruesome details) all the stronger and more vicious, alongside the fact that many seasoned professionals in the field had already been rubbed up the wrong way by GiveWell’s perceived arrogance and naivety (the two founders are recent converts from hedge fund management, and their initial response was to offer the MetaFilter community money by way of an apology).

The laundry continues to be aired in public too. The much-respected blogger Lucy Bernholz is on GiftWell’s board, and has posted here asking what she/the organisation should do.  Having put itself forward, as Jeff Trexler puts it, as a model of accountability, it will be interesting to see how it pans out.

What’s interesting about this, I think, is not only the importance of walking the walk as far as transparency is concerned, but also about really understanding the internet and its power (constructive and destructive). If people thought that this blog was being used to advertise products, or had press releases placed with it, it would damage the credibility…as would any suggestion that we were making up comments on this blog or other people’s. At the same time, people expect the blog to represent and inform about the work of SSE and its students and Fellows, amongst other material, in as fair and objective a way as possible. We don’t always get the tone right, and sometimes have strong, subjective opinions, but trying to manipulate the audience is never an option, as GiveWell are discovering.

Incidentally, our new intern Thor does exist and is not a figment of my imagination. He’ll be giving the unvarnished, barely moderated truth in his month-long stay with us here….

[UPDATE: the GiveWell founder has been demoted to Program Officer, according to this official statement from the organisation’s board]