Study of arts, music grant programs finds gaps among award recipients

A new study examining how Austin distributes Hotel Occupancy Tax funds for arts and culture programs found that some groups and areas of the city are missing out on the progress being made in helping some historically underserved communities.

The study conducted by the research group Measure looked at Cultural Arts programs like Elevate and Thrive, as well as the Live Music Fund, and found that Black and Asian artists often received grants at higher rates than their share of the population, with LGBTQIA applicants consistently showing higher acceptance rates. In comparison, Hispanic artists, younger applicants and those living in certain City Council districts were underrepresented.

The study summary, which was presented and discussed at last week’s Arts Commission meeting, did not include statistical breakdowns to complement its findings or recommendations.

To fix these gaps, the report suggests making the application process all programs easier, offering more grant-writing help and ensuring funds reach historically underserved communities. One major recommendation is to create a community advisory panel to help guide funding decisions, making sure money is going where it’s needed most.

The study also calls for multiyear funding commitments so arts organizations aren’t left scrambling for support year after year, and for better tracking of program outcomes to measure long-term impact.

With artists and organizations that receive technical assistance, such as training from the Long Center for the Performing Arts, shown to be significantly more likely to secure funding, the study’s author discussed the possibility of making assistance a mandatory part of the application process.

“With the technical assistance that was provided, there was a statistically significant difference for outcomes based on recipients of the technical support, so if you receive the support, you’re much more likely to get approved than if you did not receive (assistance),” analyst LaCole Foots told the commission.

“Our recommendation for that was to just mandate technical assistance if it’s that much of a difference in outcomes … just make everybody do it, and that itself is hard to do,” Foots said.

The report also urges the city to set aside specific funding for BIPOC-led projects and invest in efforts that restore and uplift historically neglected cultural spaces. Without intentional changes, the study warns, the same communities will continue to be left behind.

The findings highlight the need to treat arts funding not just as an economic boost, but as a way to ensure all of Austin’s creative voices have a fair shot at success. With more than $20 million in HOT funds allocated annually, the study argues that the city has a responsibility to distribute these resources fairly and strategically to reach a wider and more diverse group of artists.

Foots cautioned that the “data lag” inherent in any research project can result in new changes in the programs not being reflected in the study findings. The leadership team of Measure praised the work of Justin Parsons, equity and inclusion coordinator for the Economic Development Department, having many of their recommendations already underway when they met to share their findings.

The structure and execution of the HOT-funded programs has been a matter of much debate in the years since they were created, with the application processes, scoring system and grant amounts coming into question.

One concern that the measure team said was consistent among its focus group sessions was the view that there was poor communication between local artists, the Arts Commission, and city staff connected to the HOT-funded programs.

Commissioner Felipe Garza said the commission may look at returning to a system of holding panels that let artists regularly give feedback on city programs that could be incorporated by relevant staff members.

“You did hear a lot about mistrust that the artists in the community had towards our commissioners, towards everyone else,” he said. “I think anytime that we rewrite a program, we have to have community members, we have to have commissioner panels coming by and share information.”

Photo made available through a Creative Commons license.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.