The Torpedo Factory

There is an old torpedo factory on the waterfront in Old Town, Alexandria, Virginia. Now, pretend you're an arts administrator, and try to imagine what is the best possible re-purposing use of a building like this, provided there is no longer a market for that many torpedos. A non-profit arts center, of course, would be your answer. I visited last weekend, and though the idea was simple, I was really taken with the implementation of it. Its name and logo reflects its original use, and its interior structure has retained much of its original character, as well. The inside space has be split into smaller units that are usually shared by two artists, and used as both work studios and gallery sales spaces. On a Sunday afternoon when I was there, many of the artists were working or selling work in their space.

A few good things happening here:

• An opportunity is created for a conversation between artist and patron; many times a patron is more likely to purchase art, and it means more to them, when they develop a connection with the artist

• Putting lots of artists in one space creates a nice community for the artists

• Putting lots of artists in one space creates a fertile ground for idea exchange and artistic progress, many times resulting in higher quality work

• Putting lots of artists in one space creates a better sales opportunity, as patrons can go and find them all easily. If the artists were spread all over town, people would never make it to all of them in a day.

• Putting lots of artists in one space creates more possibility for exposure to art that a patron would not seek out on his own. Ex. You go to look at the oil paintings, and discover you like ceramic sculpture.

• Provides a lower-cost option for an artist than having his own studio

• Surrounding community probably benefits from having hip cool artists around - people are attracted to the area and generate economic activity in the coffee shops, restaurants, clothing stores, etc. (Though, as a good student of Dr. Rushton, I have to disclaim about the ability to generate an exact price tag for the economic impact.)

• An old building was not torn down so a new one could go up - the old one, full of character, was used for a new purpose, retaining character in the neighborhood, but allowing for new activity to thrive

• Torpedo Factory does the marketing for the group, like an antique mall

• Torpedo Factory is in a prime location in Old Town, and on the Potomac River, that artists probably wouldn't have access to for work spaces otherwise (the views out some of the studio windows are breathtaking)

• Torpedo Factory uses the building for special event rentals, and has a gift shop, for ancillary income. (From this gift shop, I bought an embroidered patch for my backpack. I like souvenirs, and I like to show my support of places doing cool things.)


What are some other benefits we can think of? Or any major drawbacks?







I took these photos during my visit. Yes, I brightened them in Photoshop. Don't judge - I had to - it was dark in there.

Smithsonian packs a (free) party and brings home the bacon

The Smithsonian was a zoo this weekend! (The cultural activity of my Oct 17; I'm almost up to date.) It was rainy outside, the museum was free, and the people came. There were children and strollers and umbrellas and wheelchairs. I was trying to decide if the museum staff was elated or frustrated.



My friend Stacie, who was visiting from out of town, commented that she really appreciated that all the Smithsonian museums are free. I said I definitely agree, but was surprised they were not more aggressive in collecting donations at the door - usually people will give a small amount when enjoying something free (this is how all NCTA folk festivals operate - what we call the "bucket brigade" - where volunteers wander the grounds and collect money in buckets). Maybe wandering is less appropriate in a museum, but they could have large donation signage and containers at the entrances. It occurred to me that maybe they don't solicit individual donations, because they receive a dominant amount of money from the government -- but I checked and there's a donate option on the Smithsonian website. I don't know how much of their income comes from public money versus private contributions, so I looked it up on GuideStar (a great resource). Here's the rundown: Their revenue was just under $493.5 million in 2008. Of this, $129 million was from public support, $119 million was from government contributions, $74 million came from program service revenue, $50 million came from membership, $43 million came from sales of inventory (gift shop, cafe, maybe?), and the rest was mostly split between assets sold, interest on savings, and special events (remarkably small at $262 thousand - recalling to mind a valuable lesson that special events are not all they're cracked up to be, in terms of relative earning potential). Their expenses came in at $406 million, giving them a solid bottom line in the black of about $85 million. So what have we learned? The Smithsonian is financially responsible, and has amazing free museums, with really high attendance, especially on rainy days.

We also ventured into the East building of the National Gallery of Art and perused the contemporary art floor. My favorite viewing was Matisse's Paper Cutouts, on special exhibit, the bright colors of which covered entire walls. He began to make them when he was recovering from surgery and painting was physically difficult.

Photos are of the main hall of the Natural History Museum, and an overhead shot of the Sea Life wing. I took both of these. The one below is me in front of the Smithsonian Castle, taken by Stacie.

The Dinner Party

While in New York City over October 3-4, Stephanie and Salina and I went to see Judy Chicago's The Dinner Party at the Brooklyn Museum of Art. A feminist piece from the 1970's that has had difficulty finding a museum home in the past, it was something I didn't know a lot about. Stephanie had done ample research on it previously (I believe in grad school under Dr. Michelle Facos - one of our favorites - at IU). The exhibit space was really well put together; it created an experience that was quiet and reflective, and dark, as you can see from the picture, with the lighting focused on the place settings. And what I thought was unusual for an art museum and contributed particularly to my appreciation and understanding was the contextual information provided. First, to carry around with you, there was a laminate-cards flip book with a brief summary of the accomplishments of each woman whose place-setting graced the table (Virginia Woolf, one of my favorites, was chosen, but many names I did not know. Woolf's place is the pale green one, second on the left in the photo). Second, beside the exhibit room, there were large panels detailing all the research of women's history done to complete the piece. There were benches in front of these, and we sat and read for a long time. Judy Chicago did her job, because I left thinking about my identity as a woman (which I do not often do) and how fortunate I was to have been born in a time period after all the brave women who fought for civility toward and equality for women for so many centuries. Also of note, the Brooklyn Museum of Art's lobby signage reads with specific admission prices. But when you go to pay, they reveal it's a "suggested" donation - and you can pay what you wish or are able. I think there's value to a pay-what-you-can pricing structure, and also a "suggested price" when accepting donations but I'm wondering about the type of research they did to conclude it was the most beneficial structure to maximize patronage. We were there on a Sunday and it seemed quiet.

Well-informed Giving

I have a few brave friends going into Development, or plainly, fundraising. We've learned both in study and practice, I think, that donors and philanthropists are becoming more hip, more aware, and more investigative regarding the organizations to whom they give their money (and rightfully so!) I was reminded of our discussions about this trend when I stumbled across this website: http://www.charitynavigator.org/. They are non-profit themselves, and have earned numerous accolades since their 2001 inception for their endeavors in evaluating and publishing financial health information on charities, to help donors make better decisions. They specifically report on how responsibly a charity functions day to day, and how well it is positioned to sustain its programs over time. There are "top 10" lists of different qualities - some fun ones such as "10 Highly-Rated Charities with Low Paid CEOs" and "10 Charities Drowning in Administrative Costs" (Jobs with Justice, and Boys Choir of Harlem tops this list).

Tax time

I am a very lucky kid, and my mom helps me fill out my taxes. I better learn fast, though, because now all 501(c)3 non-profits are required to file taxes (it used to be only those with income over $25,000, and those of us working at really small non-profits didn't have to worry about it). Now those with less than $25,000 need to file a simplified version of the 990, called a 990-N, or an e-Postcard. The IRS website says, "The Pension Protection Act of 2006 added this filing requirement to ensure that the IRS and potential donors have current information about your organization." Interestingly, though, they're not due until a month after everyone else's tax day: "The e-Postcard is due every year by the 15th day of the 5th month after the close of your tax year" (so May 15, presuming your tax year ends Dec 31). Last year was the first year this was required.

Fairness: Loyalty versus accessibility

At Sundance, tickets are in high demand, especially for premiere category films and particular screenings in the first few days. We don't say a film "sold out" because it may still be possible for people to get tickets in the waitlist line - but this does not appease many patrons who have bought ticket packages and called to fulfill them over our call-in line and can't get tickets to the screenings they want. Some patrons have been coming to Sundance for years, even decades, and understandably become frustrated that their lottery-assigned time to reserve tickets is later in the process and tickets for some screenings have run out.

Shouldn't they have had the chance to get the best tickets first? Shouldn't they be rewarded for loyalty? Good question.

In many arts non-profits it seems a good idea to offer preferential treatment (such as early ticket selection opportunity) to long-standing patrons, especially those paying big bucks for large ticket packages. The problem is, in an organization as big as Sundance, with an enormous number of people who have been long-standing patrons, plus the number of people who come in as part of the industry/press and artist groups, we would run out of tickets for anyone else if we rewarded everyone who has some kind of connection or loyalty to the organization.

Sundance honors a strong commitment to be accessible to a wide developing independent audience, and also to give some priority to the local Utah community. To be true to these goals, we have to make tickets available to these groups, not just those already in the industry, and those that have been attending for years. The most fair way the ticketing dept has found to make tickets available is with a lottery system - you register to get a time slot and one is randomly assigned to you within a few-day period. This results in happy people, who got early time slots, and generally less-happy people who got later time slots. This puts everyone on the same playing field for ability to obtain tickets.

The idea of accessibility is something we ponder a lot in grad school. As arts administrators, is it our jobs to make the arts accessible to all? To break down stereotypes and social barriers that serve up the arts as "elite?" It seems an ideal notion; art for all. And I've noted this week that this commitment comes at a price - telling loyalists preferential treatment is not available and perhaps risking their support and some sales. It's particularly difficult to honor this when other organizations CAN give preferential treatment to some (often without sacrificing accessibility for all). But I like Sundance's ideals - regardless of how big and popular they get, they seem to stay true to their roots "supporting independent artists and audiences." So I continue to explain on our customer service line this week..."I'm sorry you got a later ticket selection time, but this is the most fair way for everyone to have a chance to get tickets."

Top 40 non-profit websites

It's always fun to see good design, especially in non-profits.
Here is a list of the Top 40 Non-Profit Websites of the year by the DesignM.ag website
http://designm.ag/inspiration/non-profit-websites/
They're worth a look.
The webguys here at Sundance were pleased to make the list.