' Hi JMm:* I ¥ *U If, K: . a k Neighborhood A National Study VOLUME ofOutdoor Arts Festivals ONE: SUMMARY National Endowment forthe Arts REPORT ResearchReport#51 A National Study ofOutdoor Arts Festivals VOLUME ONE: SUMMARY REPORT National Endowment for the Arts Research Report #51 ResearchReport#51 August2010 National EndowmentfortheArts NW 1100PennsylvaniaAvenue, Washington,DC20506-0001 Telephone:202-682-5400 PreparedfortheOfficeofResearch&AnalysisbyBohneSilber,Silber&Associates andCaroleRosenstein,PhD,GeorgeMasonUniversity ProducedbytheOfficeofResearch&Analysis SunilIyengar,Director SarahSullivan,SeniorProgramAnalyst OtherNEAstaffcontributors:MarioGarciaDurham,TomBradshaw,BonnieNichols, NonaMilstead,KelliRogowski,PatriciaShaffer,andEllenGrantham EditorialandpublicationassistancebyDonBall DesignedbyBethSchlenoffDesign TheNationalEndowmentfortheArtswouldliketothanktheAssociationof PerformingArtsPresentersforprovidingvaluableadviceandfeedbackthroughout thecourseofthestudy.Thanksarealsoduetothefollowingindividualswho composedaninformalworkinggroupforthestudy:MichaelAlexander,PhilipHorn, SteveSchmader,RobbWoulfe,StephanieHughley,HuongVu,TedRussell,Helen Sause,ClaudiaNorman,DavidRivel,JenniferLena,andAngelaHan.Finally,the NEAwouldliketothanktheorganizationsthathelpedtogeneratethelistoffestival organizerssurveyedforthenationalstudyand/orthathelpedtodistributethesurvey tofestivalorganizers.Seepage67fordetails. FrontCoverPhoto:LatinsensationJulietaVenegasreachesouttoapackedcrowd atSummerStageinCentralPark,NewYorkCity,NY.PhotobyJackVartoogian©/ FrontRowPhoto PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationDataisnotavailableatthe timeofpublication. AvailableafterSeptember30,2010,inthePDFversionofthereportatarts.gov. 202-682-5496Voiee/TTY (adeviceforindividualswhoaredeaforhearing-impaired) K IndividualswhodonotuseconventionalprintmaterialsmaycontacttheArts Endowment'sOfficeforAccessAbilityat202-682-5532toobtainthispublicationin analternateformat. Thispublicationisavailablefreeofchargeatarts.gov,thewebsiteoftheNational EndowmentfortheArts. from Your Neighborhood Live A Message from the Chairman When I arrived at the NEA, I knew two words to be true: “artworks.” Over the past 12 months, I have used these two words to mean three things. They are a noun—works ofart—the stuffthatartists produce. Theyremindusofthewaysthat art works on audiences to engage and inspire us, to chal- lenge us, to comfort us. And they are a bold declaration that arts workers are real workers who are part of this country’s economyand communities. And as I have travelled around over the past year, I have seen again and again that artworks everywhere. Itworks inMemphis,Tennessee,andinSanFrancisco, California. It works in Idaho Falls, Idaho, and it works in Chelsea, Michigan. It works in the iconic arts buildings—the museums, concert halls, and theaters—where manyofus have had seminal experiences. It also works in schools, community centers, and houses ofworship, where many ofus have important “informal arts” experiences. Informal arts participation was the subject of a recent NEA Research Note, one that was especially important to me because it was not an area that the NEA had previously examined. Similarly, this report is important for itsveryexistence. This is the most comprehensive surveyofAmerica’s outdoorarts festivals thatwe know. And it is an important examination becauseearlierresearch has shownus that some 102 million people attend arts and cultural festivalsannuallyin thiscountry. That’s alotofartworkingforalotofAmericanseveryyear, and it is time thatwe started to examine these festivals more closely. Itisalways myhope thatNEAresearchreports spurquestions,conversation, andaction, and the data presented here are rich fodder for all three. Afteryou finish readingLiveFrom YourNeighborhood, IhopeyouwillconsidersharingyourreactionswithusontheArtWorks blogat arts.gov. Rocco Landesman Chairman National Endowment fortheArts Digitized by the Internet Archive 2015 in https://archive.org/details/livefromyourneig01silb Table of Contents Preface 7 Executive Summary 9 Purpose and Background ofthe Study 14 Section 1: Range ofFestival Types, by Program and Mission 18 Section 2: Public Access to Festivals 24 Section 3: A Multi-Dimensional Arts Experience 28 Section 4: Composition ofFestivalAudiences 32 Section 5: Integration with Community Life 36 Section 6: Festival Administration 40 Section 7: Statistical Snapshots ofFestivals, byArtistic Discipline 48 Conclusions 66 Research Methodology 67 Annex: National Survey Questionnaire 72 ListofFigures Figure 1. Geographic Distribution ofFestivals in the Survey 15 Figure 2. Percent ofFestivals, by Month(s) in Which They Occurred 15 Figure 3. Percent Distribution ofFestivals, by Organizer’s Report ofFestival Type 20 Figure 4. Percent ofFestivals, byArtistic Disciplines Represented 20 Figure 5. Percent ofFestivals, by Number ofExhibiting or PerformingArtists 21 Figure 6. Percent ofFestivals, by Total Number ofScheduled Performances 21 Figure 7. Percent ofFestivals, byAdmission Fee Structure 25 Figure 8. Percent ofFestivals That Charge for Admission, byAverage Fee 26 Figure 9. Percent ofFestivals That Charge an Admission with a Discount Ticketing Program 26 Figure 10. Percent ofFestivals, byVenue During Most Recent Season 27 Figure 11. Percent ofFestivals with an Artistic Staff, StaffPerson, orVolunteer Whose Primary Role Is Arts Curator orArts Event Programmer 30 Figure 12. Percent ofSelf-identified Visual Arts Festivals That Are Juried 30 Figure 13. Percent ofFestivals, by Number ofAttenders in the Most Recent Season 33 Figure 14. Percent ofFestivals, by Most Common Age Group Represented in Audience 33 Figure 15. Percent ofFestivals, by Number ofYears They Have Been Produced in the Same Town 37 Figure 16. Percent ofFestivals, by Number ofWorkshops, Lectures, or Other Educational Events Scheduled over Festival’s Duration 38 Figure 17. Percent ofFestivals, by Source ofSponorship/Donations During the Most Recent Season 38 Figure 18. Percent Distribution ofFestivals, by Organization’s Number ofFTEs 39 Figure 19. Percent ofFestivals by Type ofIn-kind Donations Received During Festival’s Most Recent Season 42 Figure 20. Percent ofFestivals byAmount ofRevenue Generated During Most Recent Season 42 Figure 21. Percent ofFestivals by Revenue Source for Most Recent Season 43 Figure 22. Percent Distribution ofFestivals, by Organization’s Projections for 2010 Revenue in Comparison with 2009 Revenue 43 Figure 23. Percent ofFestivals, by Organization’s Strategy for Offsetting Lower Revenue in 2010 44 Figure 24. Percent ofFestivals, by Total Expenses During Most Recent Season 44 Figure 25. Percent ofFestivals, by TotalArtist Fees Paid 45 Figure 26. Percent ofFestivals, by Total Value ofIn-kind Payments to Artists 45 Figure 27. Percent ofOutdoorArts Festivals, by Total Audience Size 51 Figure 28. Percent ofOutdoorArts Festivals, by Total Revenue During Last Season 51 Figure 29. Percent ofOutdoorArts Festivals, by Total Expenses During Last Season 51 Figure 30. Percent ofArts and Crafts Festivals, by Total Audience Size 53 Figure 31. Percent ofArts and Crafts Festivals, by Total Revenue During Last Season 53 Figure 32. Percent ofArts and Crafts Festivals, by Total Expenses During Last Season 53 Figure 33. Percent ofMultidisciplinary Festivals, by Total Audience Size 55 Figure 34. Percent ofMultidisciplinary Festivals, by Total Revenue During Last Season 55 .. Figure 35. Percent ofMultidisciplinary Festivals, by Total Expenses During Last Season. 55 Figure 36. Percent ofMusic Festivals, by Total Audience Size 57 Figure 37. Percent ofMusic Festivals, by Total Revenue During Last Season 57 Figure 38. Percent ofMusic Festivals, by Total Expenses During Last Season 57 Figure 39. Percent ofPerformingArts Festivals, by Total Audience Size 59 Figure 40. Percent ofPerformingArts Festivals, by Total Revenue During Last Season 59 .... Figure 41. Percent ofPerformingArts Festivals, by Total Expenses During Last Season... 59 Figure 42. Percent ofRacial and Ethnic Festivals, by Total Audience Size 61 Figure 43. Percent ofRacial and Ethnic Festivals, by Total Revenue During Last Season.. 61 Figure 44. Percent ofRacial and Ethnic Festivals, by Total Expenses During Last Season 61 Figure 45. Percent ofTheater Festivals, by Total Audience Size 63 Figure 46. Percent ofTheater Festivals, by Total Revenue During Last Season 63 Figure 47. Percent ofTheater Festivals, by Total Expenses During Last Season 63 Figure 48. Percent ofVisual Arts Festivals, by Total Audience Size 65 Figure 49. Percent ofVisual Arts Festivals, by Total Revenue During Last Season 65 Figure 50. Percent ofVisualArts Festivals, by Total Expenses During Last Season 65 ListofTables Table 1. Overview ofCase Study Festival Characteristics 17 Table 2. Festival Types Listed on Survey Questionnaire 19 Table 3. Percent Distribution ofEvents at Festivals, by Organizer’s Description ofFestival Type 29 Table 4. Demographic Make-up ofFestival Audiences, as Reported by Festival Organizers, in Comparison with U.S. Census and SPPA Figures 34 Table 5. Average Number ofStaffPer Festival 39 Table 6. Type ofOrganization 41 Table 7. Revenue by Self-Reported Festival Type 43 Table 8. Expenses by Festival Type 45 Table 9. Types ofMusic at Music Festivals 56 Table 10. Types ofTheater at Theater Festivals 62 Table 11. Types ofVisual Arts at Visual Arts Festivals 64 Preface T his studybegan with a readilyunder- Arelated attribute ofarts festivals is a blurring of standable impulse: to enumerate the boundaries. Nowhere is this feature more evident nation’s outdoor arts festivals and to than in the relationship between festivals and the identify their shared and divergent greatercommunity.Localgovernmentsandbusiness- traits, considering factors such as eshave invested inoutdoorartsfestivals as atokenof event programming, staffing, finances, and audience civicpride,apledgeredeemedbythehighlevelofvol- demographics. unteerism that propels festivals year afteryear, sea- Thereasonforthisqueryisalsostraightforward.To son after season. Studies by sociologists Mark Stern date,nosinglereportordatabasecarriessuchcompre- and Susan Seifert, coupled with the NEA’s own re- hensive information about arts festivals nationwide. search on the statistical links between arts participa- Given their pervasive role in American cultural life, tion and civic engagement, provide a context for this this discrepancyis something more than a matterfor understanding.1 regret. Repeatiterationsofthe NEA’sSurveyofPublic Thewordfestivalisetymologicallyalliedwithfeast. Participation in the Arts (SPPA) have shown that fes- Festivalsconveyasmorgasbordofartsexperiencesand tivals and fairs collectivelyattract more unique audi- opportunitiesthatwouldbaffleeventhemostintrepid encemembersperyearthanmostartsevents. researcher. Yet this study is a modest start. Byexam- In 2008 alone, more than 55 million U.S. adults at- ining a cross-section ofU.S. festivals—self-identified tended at least one arts-and-crafts fair or festival in as predominantly “outdoors” and featuring “arts and the past year, and 47 million attended at least one cultural” programming—we hope to have established outdoorperformingartsfestival. (Approximately 14% abasisforfutureexplorationintotheirsignificancefor ofAmericans attended both.) In sheer numbers, at- artists, audiences, and communities. Ideally, the sur- tendance rates forfestivals farexceed those for many veyandcasestudyresultswillpromptotherartsorga- single types ofart activities—classical musicconcerts, nizationstoask:whatarefestivalsdoingrightandhow forexample,ortheater,ballet,oropera. canwereplicateit? But the size oftheiraudiences is not the onlychar- acteristic that merits serious study of arts festivals. Sunil Iyengar Mario Garcia Durham Festival audiences, on average, are more diverse than Director,Research Director, those for many other types oflive art events. As the &Analysis Presenting&Artist SPPAdata reveal (and as the present studyobserves), Communities festival audiences seem to more closely resemble the general population than do othergroups ofart-goers. Thisfindingis notableas artsorganizations strive not NATIONAL only to build new audiences but, what may be more important,toactuatepotentialaudiencesthatalready existamonggroupswhoengageinartthroughavariety STUDY ofwaysnotoftenacknowledgedorstudied. Overthelastdecade, arts presentershavelearnedto OF respond toshiftingexpectations amongliveaudiences, particularlyyoungadults. Theseaudiencescraveanew OUTDOOR level ofinteractivity, theyvalue personal creation and performance aspartoftheoverallartsexperience, and they appear to prefer those activities in informal set- ARTS tings.Outdoorartsfestivalsareuniquelypoisedtobridge those expectations with innovative arts programming. Asthecasestudiesinthisreportillustrate,festivalau- FESTIVALS Note diences derive special satisfaction from encounters with artists and art forms in an open space that rein- 1SternandSeifert’sworkcanbefoundatwww.sp2.upenn.edu/ SIAP/andNEA’sresearchontheartsandcivicengagementcanbe forceschoice,experimentation,andfreemovement. foundatarts.gov. 7 REPORT SUMMARY I: VOLUME 8