Dear ARCCO Members, by now you will have received your results from the Canada Council. Congratulations to the 12 members who received increases in either your grants or supplementary funds. I hope you will take the time to review this email regarding the recent teleconference that was held with Canada Council in light of these results. I hope you will pay particular attention to ARCCO’s commentary and notes. |
|||
| Overview and Context for the ARC Competition 2004-2006 with The Canada Council for the Arts Recently ARCCO, with the other regional ARC representatives were invited to teleconference with the Canada Council to discuss the context of the recent ARC competition. This new initiative was undertaken by Annie Gauthier. To see the list of officers at Council and the regional representatives who were invited to joined the teleconference, scroll to the bottom of this document. François Lachapelle stated that he had no particular agenda other than to provide an overview and context for the recent competition. He was also clear to point out that he was not asking the regional representatives to do the Canada Council’s job and deliver the results of the competition to our regional members. Overview/Review There were 92 applicants, 75 were awarded grants, 41 centres were graded excellent or very good. These applicants received supplementary funds. ARCCO’s Notes: In the last assessment in 2002, 40 received supplementary funds – slight difference in range, this assessment the range is slightly higher, between $3000- $20,000, as opposed to $1000-20,000 in 2001 Note: Some major adjustments were made for those centres receiving smaller grants – the CC increased their grants through the supplementary funds. ARCCO’s Report and Commentary Number of applicants who were put on annual funding 19 this round as compared to 8 in 2002 CC said the 19 centres that were put on annual funding, were either due to the fact that they were merging, or in transition. Of the 19 centres, 4 are being given warnings and have lost up to 10% of their funding. Decreases in funding reflect poor or especially very poor grading. When asked about the high number of applicants who were put onto annual funding – Council pointed to assessment by jury members. Council also pointed out that in the past the centres who received poor evaluation took great care to act on the changes that were recommended ARCCO raised concern about the 2 year stream of funding as opposed to annual funding situation for the ARCs and questioned whether or not a two- tiered system is being created, stating that that the annual stream of funding could de-stabilize ARCs. Jewell noted that the system of annual funding has been put in place by Canada Council and not by the jury. In response, Francois said that there are no changes to the program and that the evaluation came from the jury. The only changes to the program remain in the availability of the supplementary funds, which is provided for one year only. He pointed out that placing centres in the annual stream of funding allows for very good centres to move up and that there would be more possibilities for good changes. ARCCO’s commentary However, in light of Canada Council’s frozen budget for the ARC program, which hasn’t increased for a couple of years and with the 17 applicants who may have proven their worth but didn’t get into the program due to budget restraints; room for centres to enter the program, alongside of current clients improving their evaluation and grant allotments seems unrealistic, at best. Where there are changes for the good of some centres this will inevitably mean that there will be changes for the bad for others. For ARCCO, to see such an increase of centres going on annual funding raises a red flag! In this recent assessment centres which had scored excellently/or very well in 2001, have been evaluated poorly this round. If you are a one of the fortunate centres who scored well this time- your centre could very well be facing the opposite situation in the next round! There are a number of reasons that this can happen and we don’t propose to have the answers, however, when ARCCO sees a number of centres go from very good evaluations to suddenly poorly within a couple of years this is disconcerting. ARCCO is hoping to work with the regional representatives to seriously review the trends over the last few years. An unspoken part of this teleconference was that there were 17 applicants who did not get into the program. In a subsequent conversation with Council, ARCCO learned that some of these applicants scored well in the adjudication process but received no funding from the Canada Council at this time. It is reasonable for the ARC community to expect a stiffer competition in the years to come. Regardless of your centre’s evaluation, ARCCO urges you to call your officer at Council ASAP to receive input on how your centre rated overall and get feedback as to what you can do to maintain your grading level and/or create a better case for your centre in the future. ARCCO will not be able to assess the changes if we don’t have an idea of your current grading score. One year of Supplementary Funds, and Need to Lobby Government As you can see that the supplementary funds are available for one year only. Determination of supplementary funds is based on the 25 million set by parliament. At this time they have not extended their commitment beyond this next year. There are no big hopes that this will be renewed. François underscored that the art community will have to lobby the government for these funds. And if that is a big IF, the Canada Council receives additional funds then Francois plans for the supplementary funds (of $425,000) to be transferred into the program permanently. ARCCO’s notes: if any kind of lobby campaign is successful then we hope that the ARCCC/CCCAA, the National ARC Association will request that more funds to be committed to the ARC program. New National ARC Association not to replace the role of Regional Associations François extended his congratulations to the ARC community for their (quick) decision to form a new national ARC association: ARCCC/CCCAA. With his congratulations he said that this new association will be able to better articulate, and strategize on the national front with national issues. He stressed that he didn’t think that this new association should replace the role of the regional associations. He noted that the Canada Council and the regional associations have developed a good relationship. The Council is very interested in going to the Regional Association’s respective AGMs. He underscored that ARCCC/CCCAA will not replace Councils’ relationship with existing Regional Associations. New Changes: Canada Council is Developing New Corporate Plan Under the new Director John Hobday, the Canada Council over the next several months will be articulating a new corporate plan. One element of this plan is that the council will be looking at the health of cultural organizations in this country. They will also be looking at the level of professionalism and quality of management. François wants to talk about this further with the ARC community within the next 12-18 months. ARCCO’s note: Canada Council’s 12-18 month time frame to develop their Corporate Plan falls within the same time as our next AGM. We will surely want this at the forefront of our discussion with the Canada Council at this time. Those in attendance at the teleconference: Canada Council officers: François Lachapelle, Annie Gauthier, Jim Logan
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|