The Stage

ACE urged to spend more on surveys

Published Tuesday 4 May 2004 at 15:55 by Sally Bramley

Arts Council England must spend more of its money on compiling statistics and less on funding clients if it does not want to miss out on government subsidy, a report by a leading independent think-tank has stated.

The Institute for Public Policy Research claims that the arts industry will be overlooked in the 2004 government spending review, due to take place in July, if it does not redress the extremely poor data for monitoring the social effects arts organisations have on their audiences.

Ian Kearns, IPPR associate director, said: “A big problem at the moment and in the past is that there is still the argument that we should fund the arts for arts sake. Arguments that the arts is special and should receive money just because of that are no longer convincing a large number of people. It is not going to wash, particularly when spending priorities are tight. There needs to be tangible proof.

“Assessing the value of the arts is not like evaluating hip operations or manufacturing output but the best way for the arts to compete for funding is to show evidence of their social benefit. There needs to be more investment and it may mean doing less but what is done is better.”

The report, For Art’s Sake: Society and the Arts in the 21st Century published on Monday, claims that just relying on economic impact studies, which were often overstated, and case studies rather than independently collected data would “place at risk” the gains in funding made since Labour came into power in 1997.

Monitoring social benefits, such as the long-term effects of working with children, young offenders or the mentally ill, leading to raised values of self-confidence and enhancing educational achievements, would “clearly demonstrate the value of the arts to other professionals and policymakers”.

The report continues: “The arts must grasp the nettle of effective evaluation now… The current failure to collect high quality data is a major failing of the sector.”

ACE director for press and public affairs David McNeill warned the IPPR report, while welcomed for raising debate about the arts, only told half the story and was arid.

Said McNeill “We should tread carefully before we start pushing organisations into producing social impact studies. They do not have the time or the money. We don’t want to give out grants for, say, £30,000 to a small group, only to have £10,000 spent on an independent survey. The arts council is trying to be less involved and collect less useless data.

“I am not sure the tax paying public or government are that foolish that they don’t know arts has a social impact. But I don’t think it is the whole story either. Arts is important for its own sake, where people see a production and feel more inspired, more energetic or more lively. That is very difficult to measure. We need common sense.”

The report comes two weeks after the National Campaign for the Arts director Victoria Todd told The Stage it was vital for arts institutions to make a case for continued public funding by demonstrating how positively the money already given had been used. “It’s no use whinging and whining,” she said.