Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice

CITYANDCOUNTYOFSANFRANCISCO
BOARDOFSUPERVISORS
BUDGETANDLEGISLATIVEANALYST
1390MarketStreet,Suite1150,SanFrancisco,CA94102
(415)5529292 FAX(415)2520461

POLICYANALYSISREPORT

To: SupervisorMar
From: BudgetandLegislativeAnalystsOffice
Date: March18,2014
Re: GrantsfortheArtsHistoricalFunding

SUMMARYOFREQUESTEDACTION

Pursuant to your request, the Budget and Legislative Analyst has conducted an
analysis of the Grants for the Arts (GFTA) program, and the funding allocations
made by the program since 1989. This report (1) describes the funding allocation
made to GrantsfortheArtsthroughthehoteltax,andthechangesmadein2013
totheBusinessandTaxRegulationsCodeprovisionallocatinghoteltaxrevenues;
2) describesthe funding criteriaandselection processused byGFTA to determine
grantees; and (3) analyzes funding allocations made to groups representing
people of color and/or underserved populations over the past twentyfive years.
This report also describes the funding criteria and selection process used by the
San Francisco Arts Commissions Cultural Equity Grants (CEG) program, and
discussesthe relationshipbetweenCEGandGFTA.Finally,it providesanoverview
of the grantee selection process used by arts commissions and granting agencies
inothercities.

FUNDING

GRANTSFORTHEARTSFUNDING

The Grants for the Arts (GFTA) program was established in 1961. It received
funding primarily through an administrative allocation of the Citys hotel tax (also
known as the Transient Occupancy Tax) until 2013. Amendments to the Business
andTaxRegulationsCode,whichwentintoeffectonSeptember1,2013,stipulate
that the majority of the hotel tax revenue will now be directed to the General
Fund. Administrative Code Section 10.10048 creates a special fund for Grants for
the Arts into which hotel tax revenue may be disbursed from the General Fund
duringthebudgetprocess.
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page2

GFTA received 7.7 percent of hotel tax revenues in FY 200607, which decreased
to 4.4 percent in FY 201314 before the revisions to the Business and Tax
RegulationsCode,asshowninthetablebelow.

Table1:HotelTaxRevenueAllocatedtoGFTA(FY20062014)

FiscalYear
HotelTax
Revenue
(Total)

GFTAAllocation

GFTAPercentage
(ofTotal)
200607
$182,604,000 $13,988,000
7.7%
200708
$224,482,167 $15,386,800
6.9%
200809
$219,776,946 $15,386,799
7.0%
200910
$192,082,240 $11,541,000
6.0%
201011
$215,511,978 $11,368,000
5.3%
201112
$242,843,060 $11,368,000
4.7%
201213
$257,899,000 $11,368,000
4.4%
201314
$271,613,000 $11,774,992
4.3%
Source:SanFranciscoControllersOffice,TransientOccupancyTaxSummary

Both hotel tax revenues and the allocation of these revenues to GFTA decreased
in FY 200910, as shown in the table above. The Mayors budget has maintained
thelowerallocationtoGFTAbetweenFY201011and201314.

Budget projections from the Controllers Office show the General Fund allocation
to GFTA remaining at $11.4 million over the next four fiscal years. As a result,
while the hotel tax revenue directed to the General Fund is projected to increase
from FY 201415 to FY 201718, the GFTA allocation as a percentage of hotel tax
revenues collected by the City will decline from approximately 4 percent in FY
201415to3.5percentinFY201718,asshowninthetablebelow.

Table2:ProjectedAllocationstoGrantsfortheArtsthrough2018

Fiscal
Year

HotelTaxRevenue
(Total)

GFTAAllocation
GFTA
Percentage
(ofTotal)
201415
$288,494,000 $11,368,000
3.9%
201516
$303,153,760 $11,368,000
3.6%
201617
$312,248,373 $11,368,000
3.6%
201718
$321,615,824 $11,368,000
3.5%
Source:SanFranciscoControllersOffice,TransientOccupancyTaxSummary

TOTALFUNDINGFORARTSPROGRAMMING

Neither the Mayors Office of Public Policy and Finance nor the Arts Commission
track the total funding that is allocated for arts programming across the Citys
departments.FY201314fundingtoCitydepartmentsprovidingartsprogramming
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page3

is$75.1million,asshowninTable3below.Thisfundingincludesmaintenanceand
operationsoffacilitiesaswellasartsprograms.
1

Table3:AllocationforArtsProgrammingbyDepartment,FY201314

DepartmentName FY201314Funds
ArtCommission $14,150,397
AsianArtsMuseum 8,744,439
DepartmentofChildren,YouthandTheirFamilies 2,784,987
EconomicandWorkforceDevelopment 925,000
FineArtsMuseum 17,107,968
GrantsfortheArts 11,774,992
RecandParks 3,791,780
SFLibrary 532,740
WarMemorial 11,934,740
YerbaBuenaCenterfortheArts
2
3,333,000
TOTAL $75,080,043
Source:CityBudgetSystem,CityDepartments,YerbaBuenaCenterAuditedFinancialStatement

PROJECTEDIMPACTONGFTAFUNDINGDUETOADMINISTRATIVECHANGES

The Business and Tax Regulations Code was revised in September 2013 to
distribute hotel tax revenues to the General Fund rather than allocate these
revenues to specific programs. In FY 201415 and future years, the amount of
General Fund monies allocated to GFTA in the Mayors budget will be a policy
decision of the Mayor. Total funding to GFTA over the longterm is difficult to
predict.TheControllersOfficeprojectsnoincreaseinthedollaramountallocated
to GFTA, thus leading to a declining percentage amount over the next four fiscal
years,asshowninTable2above.

Further, as will be explained in detail below, GFTA does not have a specific
definition of, or funding criteria for, arts organizations that represent people of
color.Asaresult,itisdifficulttopredictfuturefundingtotheseartsorganizations.
As GFTA grantees tend to receive recurring support once initially approved, it is
possibletostatethatexistinggranteesarelikelytocontinuetoreceivefundsuntil

1
City funding to the (a) Asian Art Museum pays for director, security services, facilities and engineering support,
and certain management, conservator, registrar and other positions; (b) Fine Arts Museums pays for the director,
certain curator positions at the Legion of Honor, security staff, and stationary engineer positions; and (c) War
Memorial pays for management, administrative support, security and facility maintenance. Nonprofit foundations
raise funds for the Asian Art Museum and Fine Arts Museums, comprising from 75 percent to 80 percent of the
Museumsannualbudgets.TheWarMemorialisresponsibleformaintainingLouiseM.DaviesSymphonyHall,War
MemorialOperaHouse,WarMemorialVeteransBuilding,HaroldL.ZellerbachRehearsalHall,andMemorialCourt.
Most funding for the San Francisco Symphony, Opera, and other cultural events are provided by nonprofit
organizations.
2
TheYerbaBuenaCenterfortheArtsisfundedthroughanOperatingAgreementwiththeSuccessorAgencytothe
San Francisco Redevelopment Agency (generally funded through tax increment and other revenues). This funding
pays for administrative and operational expenses. Funding for arts and education programs are raised directly by
theCenter.
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page4

they decline to reapply. It is not possible to predict whether new organizations

willreceivefundinginthefuture.

GRANTSFORTHEARTSGRANTMAKINGPROCESS

FUNDINGCRITERIA

Grants for the Arts aims to provide a reliable, sustained source of funding to
organizations that produce annual arts programming for the general public,
includingvisitors.

Organizationsmust:

Haveasaprimarypurposethepublicperformanceordisplayofartworks
inSanFrancisco;
Have nonprofit status and have been based in San Francisco for at least
threefullyearsatthetimeoftheirapplication;
Begovernedbyalegallyconstitutedboardofdirectors;
Notbetheprimaryresponsibilityofagovernmentagency;
Produce an annual, dependable San Francisco season of activities for the
public, including visitors. The season should include at least one self or
coproducedSanFranciscoactivity;
PlanandpublicizeprogrammingtoattractvisitorstoSanFrancisco;
Reach an audience appropriate to the activity and produce accurate
recordsofpatronage;
Produceconsistentlyprofessionalqualitywork;
Be in goodstanding on previous GFTA grants and with other City
departments;
Demonstratefinancialhealthby:
o Receivingoutsidesourcesoffunding;
o Managingabudgetsizeandpercentageofearnedrevenue
appropriatetotheactivity;
o Havingaminimumbudgetofatleast$35,000;
o Notcarryinganunreasonableaccumulateddebt;and
o Not being overly dependent on any one source of contributed
income.
Demonstratesoundadministrationandfiscalmanagementby:
o Creatinganorganizationalstructure(staff,volunteers,artists,
board)appropriatetothesizeandnatureoftheorganization;
o Havinganactiveboardofdirectors/advisoryboard;
o Preparingandsubmittingyearlyfinancialstatements;and
o Havingareasonableplantoretiredebtifapplicable.
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page5

Organizations that sponsor celebrations and parades may also apply for GFTA
dollars, and they must comply by similar requirements. They must also broadly
celebrate and preserve the cultural identity and/or traditional activities of the
Citys various populations, have significant support from a substantial segment of
thecommunity,andhaveasignificantperformanceorartcomponent.

GFTASELECTIONPROCESS

Organizations that are newly applying for GFTA funds must submit a written
application that documents their fiscal and administrative health, while also
providing evidence that their programming is highquality. Once GFTA has
receivedthe application, asite visit is scheduled. Thepurpose ofthe site visit and
written application together are to determine how the organization manages its
programs, whetherit isfulfilling its potential andwhat audience segment is being
served.

The information gathered and reviewed by staff is then presented to the GFTA
Citizens Advisory Committee. The Committee recommends to the City
Administratorfororagainstfundingtheorganization. MembersoftheCommittee
are appointed by the City Administrator. Individuals may apply to be part of the
Committee;stafffromGFTAhasalsorecommendedindividualsfortheCommittee
totheAdministrator.AccordingtoKarySchulman,DirectorofGFTA,the members
of the Committee bring a variety of skills and perspectives to the role and consist
ofindividualsfromdiversebackgrounds.

Each year, GFTA receives applications from 3040 new organizations. Depending
on the funding available, the organization makes awards to between 5 and 15 of
the organizations.It isthegoalofGFTAto fundeveryorganizationthatmeetsthe
criteriadetailedabove,basedonavailablefunding.

Once an organization has received GFTA funding, they must apply annually to
have their funding renewed. Organizations submit an abbreviated written
application for each subsequent year that they apply. Most organizations that
previously received funding receive new funds when they reapply. Ms. Schulman
notes that GFTA works to help grantee organizations address organizational and
programmatic challenges as they arise so that they can continue to receive
funding;anorganizationthathasreceivedfundinginthepastwouldgenerallynot
be denied funds during a subsequent application. Denying continued funding to
existinggranteesisuncommon,andtherefore Ms.Schulmansaiditwouldbevery
difficult to determine whether there was a pattern of people of color
organizations being denied funds more frequently than other groups. When
organizations disappear from the grantee roster over time, it is usually because
theydeclinedtoreapplyforfunds.

All grant dollars are distributed as reimbursements. Organizations must submit

the appropriate paperwork and receipts before they can receive payments. GFTA
aims to provide significant support to grantees, while also preventing them from
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page6

becoming overly dependent on GFTA as a sole or major source of funds, as is a

best practice in arts funding. The following funding guidelines are provided for
organizations. All percentages are to be based on the last completed fiscal year
budget for the organization. GFTA emphasizes that these percentages are the
fundinggoal,butthattheyarenotguaranteed.Theminimumgrantsizeis$5,000.

Organizationswithbudgetsofunder$350,000:15%.
Budgetsofmorethan$350,000butlessthan$750,000:10%.
Budgetsofmorethan$750,000butlessthan$1,000,000:8%.
Budgetsofmorethan$1,000,000butlessthan$3million:6%.
Budgetsofmorethan$3millionbutlessthan$10million:5%.
Budgetsofmorethan$10million:nosetpercentage;meaningful
sustainingfundswillbeawarded.
HISTORICALFUNDINGFORPEOPLEOFCOLORORGANIZATIONS

CalculationofGFTAFundingtoPeopleofColorOrganizations

AccordingtotheGFTAAnnualReport,themissionofGFTAistopromotetheCity
through support of the arts by funding nonprofit arts and cultural organizations
that help promote San Francisco as a destination for regional, national and
international visitors. GFTA does not have a definition or criteria for granting
funds to people of color organizations separate from other nonprofit arts
organizations. To determine the extent to which GFTA funds have been awarded
to people of color and/or other underrepresented organizations, it was necessary
to first develop a working definition for this type of organization. The Budget and
Legislative Analysts Office developed the following definition, and
categorizations,forthepurposesofthisreport.
As GFTA aims to fund organizations that provide performances and other artistic
experiences to as wide an audience as possible, the definition did not focus
specifically on the audience segment served. Instead, underrepresented
organizations were identified by the racial/ethnic, gender, and sexual orientation
of the leadership and staff members. In addition to the background of the
individualsinvolved,themissionoftheorganizationmustalso betorepresentthe
viewpoints, experiences, and/or history of people of color or underrepresented
groups,and/ortoprovideartsprogrammingdirectlytothesegroups.

The total grants made to people of color organizations were tallied by the
following categories: Asian, AfricanAmerican, Hispanic/Latino, American Indian,
and Multiracial. The total grants made to ethnic minorities were calculated by
totaling the grants made to Arab/Middle Eastern and Jewish organizations. To
calculate the total allocated to underrepresented gender groups, grants made to
LesbianGayBisexualTransgenderQueer(LGBTQ),andWomenweretotaled.The
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page7

Asian category included Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Indian, and Pacific Islander.
The Hispanic/Latino category included groups representing the Caribbean, Central
and South America. Funding for an organization was assigned to the Multiracial
group category if two or more racial groups are represented but were
predominantlyrepresentedbypeopleofcolor.

Afewexceptionstothisdefinitionweremade. TheSanFranciscoGirlsChoruswas
counted against the total for Women, but the San Francisco Boys Chorus was not
counted against the total for any underrepresented organization. An organization
known as Sukay that performs the music from Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru,was not
counted against the Hispanic/Latino total because its founders are Caucasian and
its mission is to introduce an international art form, rather than to represent the
LatinocommunityintheBayArea.

Organizations that represent two communities, and where one of the

communities is a racial designation, were tallied against the total for the racial
group. For example, Pomo Afro Homos is an organization representing the
perspectivesof gay, AfricanAmericanmen. This organizationwas countedagainst
the total for AfricanAmerican organizations, not the total for LGBTQ. For
organizations that could be counted as either LGBTQ or Women, for example, a
judgment was made as to which of these two groups the organization more
closelyrepresents.

The grants made to the Citys cultural centers were included in the overall grant
total calculated for each year, and were included in the total for the appropriate
racial group. In the later years, the amount granted by GFTA to the four cultural
centers the Bayview Opera House, the AfricanAmerican Arts and Culture
Complex, SOMArts, and the Mission Cultural Center for Latino Arts are reported
as a lump sum. To allocate these funds among the centers, the total was divided
byfourandeachpartassignedtotheappropriateracialgroupforthatyear.

To calculate grant awards to all arts organizations each year, the grant amounts
listed in the annual reports under the following categories were included: Dance,
Literary Arts, Media, MultiArts, Music, Theater, Visual Arts, Annual
Celebrations/Parades, TouristSupport Organizations, Cultural Centers, and the
Regranting Program, in the years it existed. Funds for nonrecurring events were
not included, nor were grants made through the Voluntary Arts Contribution
Fund.

In the table below, three percentages are displayed for each year. The first
percentage captures the total funding that went to organizations representing
people of color, namely Asians AfricanAmericans, Hispanics/Latinos, American
Indians, and groups with the multiracial designation. A second percentage
displays the total funds going to ethnic organizations with the Arab/Middle
Eastern and Jewish designations. Finally, the third percentage includes the total
fundingthatwenttoorganizationsintheLGBTQandWomencategories.
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page8

Table4:HistoricalFundingtoGroupsbyRace,EthnicityandGender19892013

Year

Percentage
toPeopleof
Color*

Percentage
toEthnic
Minorities**

Percentageto
Women/LGBTQ
198990 20% 1% 5%
199091 23% 1% 4%
199192 19% 1% 5%
199293 21% 1% 5%
199394 21% 1% 5%
199495 22% 1% 6%
199596 21% 1% 5%
199697 23% 1% 5%
199798 24% 0% 5%
199899 30% 1% 5%
19992000 23% 1% 5%
20002001 23% 2% 5%
20012002 24% 2% 6%
20022003 25% 2% 5%
20032004 24% 2% 5%
20042005 23% 2% 6%
20052006 25% 2% 6%
20062007 25% 2% 7%
20072008 21% 2% 7%
20082009 21% 2% 7%
20092010 19% 3% 7%
20102011 21% 2% 6%
20112012 22% 3% 7%
20122013 21% 2% 7%
AVERAGE 23% 2% 6%
Source:GrantsfortheArtsAnnualReports,19892013

* The people of color category includes the following groups: Asian, AfricanAmerican,
Hispanic/Latino,AmericanIndianandMultiRacial.
**Theethnicminoritygroupcategoryincludes:Arab/MiddleEasternandJewish.

Over the 25 year period, organizations representing people of color received on

average 23 percent of GFTA funds, with 19 percent of funds being the minimum
receivedduringthatperiod,and30percentoffundsbeingthemaximumreceived.
Beginning in FY 200607, the percentage of funding to people of color
organizationshastrendeddownward.
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page9

Chart1:PercentageChangeinFundingtoOrganizationsRepresentingPeopleofColor
fromFY199900toFY201213

Source:GFTA,BudgetandLegislativeAnalystsOffice

AsGFTAdoesnotspecificallyaimtofundpeopleofcolorartsorganizationsofany
type, the variation in the percentage of funding to these groups is based on the
overall application and grant award process. GFTA does not have specific
information on why the percentage of funding to people of color organizations
hasbeenlowerinthepastsixyearscomparedtoearlieryears.

ComparisonofFundingtoPeopleofColorOrganizationstoTotalGFTAFunding

Another question posed was whether the percentage increase to people of color
organizationswascomparable to the percentageincrease inGFTAfundingoverall.
The following chart indicates that over the years in question, the percentage
increasetopeopleofcolorgroupswasapproximatelythesameasthepercentage
increase in funding overall. That said, in certain years such as FYs 199899 and
200708, the difference between the percentage change overall and to people of
colorgroupsvarieswidely.
Organizations Representing People of Color
25%

20%

15%

10%
PercentageofTotalGFTA
Funding
5
%

1
9
9
9

2
0
0
0

2
0
0
0

2
0
0
1

2
0
0
1

2
0
0
2

2
0
0
2

2
0
0
3

2
0
0
3

2
0
0
4

2
0
0
4

2
0
0
5

2
0
0
5

2
0
0
6

2
0
0
6

2
0
0
7

2
0
0
7

2
0
0
8

2
0
0
8

2
0
0
9

2
0
0
9

2
0
1
0

2
0
1
0

2
0
1
1

2
0
1
1

2
0
1
2

2
0
1
2

2
0
1
3
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page10

Chart2:PercentageChangeinTotalFundingandFundingtoPeopleofColor
Organizations*

Source:GrantsfortheArtsAnnualReports,19892013

*
The categorypeople of color includes organizations with the designation: Asian, African
American,Hispanic/Latino,AmericanIndian,andmultiracial.

The tables below demonstrate how GFTA funding awards to organizations

representing people of color in 1990, 2000 and 2010 compare to the Citys
demographicbreakdown.
Table5:ComparisonofDemographicBreakdowntoGFTAFundingAwards
(2010)

2010Percentages

GFTAFunding

(FY201011)

Population
Funding
Percentageis
Greater/(Less)
than
Population
Percentage
PredominantlyWhite* 77.7% 42.3% 35.4%
PeopleofColor** 22.3% 57.7% 35.4%
8.0% 5.8% 2.2%
6.0% 33.4% 27.4%
4.0% 15.1% 11.1%
0.3% 0.2% 0.1%
AfricanAmerican
Asian
Hispanic/Latino
AmericanIndian
Twoormoreraces 4.0% 3.2% 0.8%
Source:U.S.CensusandGFTAAnnualReports,19892013
30%
20%
10%
0%
10%
20%
30%

PercentageChangeinGFTAFundingOverall
PercentageChangeforPeopleofColorGroups
1
9
9
0

9
1

1
9
9
1

9
2

1
9
9
2

9
3

1
9
9
3

9
4

1
9
9
4

9
5

1
9
9
5

9
6

1
9
9
6

9
7

1
9
9
7

9
8

1
9
9
8

9
9

1
9
9
9

2
0
0
0

2
0
0
0

2
0
0
1

2
0
0
1

2
0
0
2

2
0
0
2

2
0
0
3

2
0
0
3

2
0
0
4

2
0
0
4

2
0
0
5

2
0
0
5

2
0
0
6

2
0
0
6

2
0
0
7

2
0
0
7

2
0
0
8

2
0
0
8

2
0
0
9

2
0
0
9

2
0
1
0

2
0
1
0

2
0
1
1

2
0
1
1

2
0
1
2

2
0
1
2

2
0
1
3
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page11

Table6:ComparisonofDemographicBreakdowntoGFTAFundingAwards
(2000)

2000Percentages

GFTAFunding
(FY200001)
Funding
Percentageis
Greater/(Less)
Population
than
Population
Percentage
PredominantlyWhite* 76.4% 43.8% 32.6%
PeopleofColor** 23.6% 56.2% 32.6%
6.0% 7.6% 1.6%
7.0% 31.2% 24.2%
5.0% 14.1% 9.1%
0.6% 0.3% 0.3%
AfricanAmerican
Asian
Hispanic/Latino
AmericanIndian
Twoormoreraces 5.0% 3.0% 2.0%
Source:U.S.CensusandGFTAAnnualReports,19892013
Table7:ComparisonofDemographicBreakdowntoGFTAFundingAwards
(1990)

1990Percentages

GFTAFunding
Funding
Percentageis
Greater/(Less)
than
Population
Percentage
(FY199091)

Population

PredominantlyWhite* 77.3% 46.6% 30.7%

PeopleofColor** 22.7% 53.4% 30.7%
4.4% 10.5% 6.1%
5.0% 28.4% 23.4%
7.0% 13.9% 6.9%
0.3% 0.4% 0.1%
AfricanAmerican
Asian
Hispanic/Latino
AmericanIndian
Twoormoreraces 6.0% 0.2% 5.8%
Source:U.S.CensusandGFTAAnnualReports,19892013
* Population percentage for predominantly white is based on the U.S. Census classification
forCaucasian.
** GFTA funding percentage for predominantly white was calculated by adding the
percentages for all of the people of color groups, and then subtracting that total from 100.
Organizationsclassifiedaspredominantlywhitecategorymayemploystafforartistsofcolor,
butdonotfitthedefinitionoforganizationsrepresentingpeopleofcoloroutlinedabove.
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page12

In FY 201011, less than onequarter of GFTA funding was allocated to arts

organizations classified as people of color
3
, although people of color made up 58
percent of the San Francisco population in 2010. Asian and Hispanic/Latino arts
organizations received the lowest percentage of funding, compared to their
representationinthepopulationasawhole.

However, while arts organizations classified as predominantly white did not

meet the criteria for people of color outlined above, many of these organizations
have staff that are people of color or display the works of people of color artists.
GFTA funding allocations to predominantly white arts organizations include the
Citys largest art organizations, such as the Ballet, Symphony, Opera, and other
organizationsthatwecategorizedaspredominantlywhite.

As a point of reference, grants made by GFTA to the citys nine largest arts
organizations, namely the San Francisco Ballet, City Arts, San Francisco Film
Society, San Francisco Symphony, San Francisco Opera, San Francisco
Performances, the Exploratorium, the Museum of Modern Art and the American
ConservatoryTheater,comprisedonethirdofthe totalgrantsmadeoverthe past
fiveyears. GFTAprovidessignificantfundstosupporttheselargeorganizations.

CULTURALEQUITYGRANTS

FUNDINGCRITERIA

The San Francisco ArtsCommissions Cultural Equity Grants (CEG) initiative funds
diverseindividualsandorganizationsthroughitsgrantprograms.

Generaleligibilityrequirementsfororganizationsacrossprogramsinclude:

Missionstatementisclearlyfocusedonthedevelopment,production
and/orpresentationofartsactivitiesinSanFrancisco;
OrganizationmustbehousedinSanFrancisco;
Organizationhasacontinuingandstablepresence,includingongoing
operations,inthecommunity;
Organization must be an active arts presenter, providing continuing arts
activity,andahomeseason,inSanFrancisco;
Organization mustbein goodstandingandhave completedreporting
requirementsonpreviousorcurrentSFACgrants;
Organizationmusthavetaxexempt,501(c)(3)status,orbeafiscally
sponsoredprojectofataxexemptorganization;
Programsofothercityagenciesnoteligibletoapply;and

3
BasedontheBudgetandLegislativeAnalystsclassificationcriteria,notedabove.
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page13

Organizationbudgetsmustmeetsizelimitationsandmayneverexceed$2
million.
CulturalEquityGrants(CEG)fundorganizationsthroughsixprograms:

1. ArtsandCommunities:InnovativePartnerships,
2. ArtsforNeighborhoodVitality,
3. CulturalEquityInitiatives,CreativeSpaceGrants,
4. theNativeAmericanArtsandCulturalTraditionsGrants(NAACT),and
5. OrganizationProjectGrants.
One hundred percent of funding for the Arts and Communities, Arts for
NeighborhoodVitality,CulturalEquityInitiativesandtheNativeAmericanArtsand
Cultural Traditions grants goes to people of color and/or underserved
organizations, including the disabled, LGBTQ and women. To determine whether
an organization serves people of color and/or underserved individuals, CEG staff
examines the mission of the organization, the composition of the board of
directors (50% of the individuals must be from the community in question), and
whetherprogrammingisreflectiveofthecommunity.
There are two types of Cultural Equity Initiative grants. Organizations may apply
forshortterm,onetimefundsofupto$25,000tostrengthentheiradministrative
infrastructure and organizational capacity. Organizations may also apply for
grants of up to $100,000 to enhance efficiency and focus on new or unrealized
organizationalcapacity.

SELECTIONPROCESS

Once an organization has submitted a written application to CEG that

demonstrates eligibility for the appropriate grant program, the application is sent
by CEG to a selection panel for review. Each grant panel has between 68
members. Members are selected that represent the diversity of San Francisco,
that have broadknowledge aboutthe particularartistic discipline and field issues,
and that have experience that aligns with the purpose of the specific grant
category.

Panelists read through the applications prior to meeting. Panel review meetings
are then called, and are open to the public. Artists and organizations may attend
the panel review during which their application is being discussed. Larger
organizations might be asked to comment on their application during the panel
review, but organizations usually just observe the proceedings. The applications
are scored against an evaluation rubric. After the panels, the scores are
aggregatedandsenttoaTaskForceforfinalreview. TheTaskForcedeterminesa
cutoff score, such that the winning applications will be funded either fully or no
lessthan75percent.
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page14

Applicants that are denied funding may participate in an appeals process.

However, applicants infrequently elect to do. According to the CEG Program
Director, CEG staff communicates with applicants throughout the application
processtopreventmisunderstandingandthedesireforappeals.

RELATIONSHIPBETWEENGFTAANDCEG

According to both Grants for the Arts and the San Francisco Arts
Commission/Cultural Equity Grants program, there is not a formal program in
place to provide people of color organizations with initial funding through CEG,
and then to graduate them to the GFTA program. Ms. Schulman noted that
althoughthismayoncehavebeenthegoal,sucharelationshipdoesnotcurrently
exist. Staff from CEG and GFTA meets once a month to discuss grantees and
potentialwaysthatthetwoprogramscanworktogether.

There is overlap between CEG and GFTA grantees. The following exhibit
demonstrates the percentage ofCEG grantees that also received GFTA grants in a
givenyear. Onaverage,48percentofCEGgranteesalsoreceivedGFTAfundsover
the past five years, once the grants made to individual artists are removed from
theCEGgrantstotal.

Table6:CEGAwardeesthatalsoReceivedGFTAFunds

CalendarYear

TotalCEG
Grantees*

Grantees that
Received CEG
andGFTAFunds
Percentage of
CEG Grantees
that Received
GFTAFunds
2009 78 43 55%
2010 112 44 39%
2011 101 48 48%
2012 80 41 51%
2013 76 35 46%
AVERAGE 89.4 42.2 48%
Source:CulturalEquityGrantsProgramDirector,andGFTAAnnualReports

*Thiscolumndoesnotincludethegrantsmadetoindividualartistsinanygivenyear.

ACTIONTAKENONTHE2006SANFRANCISCOARTSTASKFORCEREPORT

In 2006, the San Francisco Arts Task Force recommended a Department of Arts
andCulturebecreatedtohousethecurrentfunctionsoftheArtsCommissionand
Grants for the Arts jointly. No steps have been taken to implement this
recommendation.
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page15

ARTSGRANTMAKINGINOTHERCITIES

Austin, San Diego and San Jose all utilize a version of the panel review process
when making arts grantmaking decisions. This process involves soliciting the
input of arts experts and allowing their deliberations to be made public. The San
Francisco Arts Commissions Cultural Equity Grants (CEG) program also utilizes a
peerreviewprocesstodeterminefundingawards.

CITYOFAUSTINCULTURALFUNDINGPROGRAM

The City of Austin funds arts programming through its Economic Development
Department. In addition to funding Art in Public Places, Tourism Resources, and
the Arts Commission, the Department administers a program known as Cultural
Funding. Support for individual artists, and organizations, is available through
three types of Cultural Funding grants, namely, Core Funding, Community
Initiatives and Cultural Expansion. Funding for arts programming is provided in
partthroughanallocationfromthecityshoteltaxrevenues.

Each of the Cultural Funding grant programs have different eligibility

requirements, and require written applications. Once the applications are
received, they are reviewed by staff and then are distributed to peer review
readers who will take part in panels. Panelists are comprised of objective and
knowledgeable arts professionals, artists, arts administrators, educators, and
community representatives with arts expertise. Peer review panels consist of
panelists from Austin, as well as a small percentage of panelists who generally
represent a regional, state,and national perspective. Panelistsmay be nominated
bymembers of the general public, and must be reviewed by the Austin Arts
Commission.

Each application is read by a primary and secondary reader. Readers review the
application prior to the panel review, and then present the application to the
entire panel once the meeting is called. Applicants may be present for the panel
meetingandmaybeaskedto answerquestionsabouttheirapplications. Allpanel
review meetings are open to members of the general public. Panelists then score
the applications based on an established criteria and rubric. Staff totals the
scores,andusesamatrixthatisapprovedbytheAustinArtsCommissiontomake
afundingaward.Theawardisbasedonthesizeoftheorganizationandthescore
thatitreceived.Anapplicantthatreceivesbelowacertainscorewillnotreceivea
fundaward.

SANDIEGOCOMMISSIONFORARTSANDCULTURE

ThroughitsCommissionforArtsandCulture,theCityofSanDiegofundsartsnon
profits to support programming, performances and other cultural exhibitions.
Fund awards for its two primary programs, Organizational Support and Creative
Communities,ismadethroughacompetitiveprocess.
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page16

The Commission annually revises, reviews, and adopts policy changes that set the
funding criteria for the programs, and then publishes a set of updated guidelines.
Nonprofit organizations submit an application by the deadline. Applications are
then reviewed and ranked by a panel of Commissioners and other community
members with special expertise. Funding awards for each organization are based
on a formula that includes the amount of funds allocated by the Mayor and City
Council, the size of the organizations budget, and the rank an organization
receivesfromthepanel.

Nominees for the Arts Commission are drawn from San Diego residents who are
arts and culture patrons, artists, educators, business professionals, arts experts,
and the general public. Efforts are made to gather nominees who come from a
diversity of backgrounds. Factors such as gender, age, socioeconomic class,
geographic location, religion, sexual orientation, skills and abilities, ethnicity,
political affiliation and professional background are taken into consideration. The
Mayordirectlyappointssevenmembersandselectstheremainingeightmembers
from a list of nominations submitted by each Councilmember. A schedule of all
Commissionmeetingsfortheyearispostedonline,andmembersofthepublicare
welcometoattend.
SANJOSEARTSCOMMISSION

Through its Office of Cultural Affairs, the City of San Jose provides arts funding in
twocategories: Arts Grants, and Festival,ParadeandCelebration Grants. The Arts
Grants category is further divided into Operating Grants, and Take pART Grants
(formerly Program and Project Grants). Applications for both types of grants are
acceptedonceayear.

SanJosealsousesapeerreviewpanelprocesstomakefundingdecisionsforallof
its grants programs. Panelists consist of representatives from the Arts
Commission and from the community, and are paid. Panelists may come from
other Bay Area communities. Review panels typically have 68 members. Panels
areheldovermultipledays,andapplicantsareabletolistentothereviewoftheir
own work. At the end of the discussion about their work, an organization has up
to three minutes to answer questions or address the panel. Applicant attendance
at the panel review is optional, but most artists and organizations do choose to
attend. Theyareabletoaddressambiguitiesintheirapplicationsattheend.

Conclusion

Underthe2013revisiontotheCitysBusinessandTaxRegulationsCode,hoteltax
revenues are distributed to the General Fund rather than allocated to specific
programs, including GFTA. As a result, the annual General Fund appropriation to
theGFTAdependsontheprioritiessetbytheMayorsbudget.ThefutureGeneral
Fundallocation, projectedby the ControllersOffice,isexpected to stay constant
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page17

at $11.4 million but when compared to hotel tax revenues distributed to the
GeneralFund,thepercentageallocationtoGFTAwilldeclineoverthenextseveral
years,unlessadditionalfundingisapprovedbytheBoard.
The mission of GFTA is to promote the City through support of the arts by
fundingnonprofitartsandculturalorganizationsthathelppromoteSanFrancisco
as a destination for regional, national and international visitors. GFTA does not
have criteria for identifying organizations representing people of color and other
underrepresented groups, nor is it required to provide a certain percentage of
funds to these organizations. Therefore, predicting how funding to these
organizationswillvary inthe future is not possible. Once anorganization receives
GFTA funds, it will likely continue to qualify for this funding until it declines to re
apply.
Over the 25 year period from FY 199890 to FY 201213, organizations
representing people of color received on average 23 percent of GFTA funds, with
19 percent of funds being the minimum received during that period, and 30
percent of funds being the maximum received. During this same period, the
percentage of the population comprised of people of color increased from 53.4
percentin1990to58percentin2010.
Beginning in FY 200607, the percentage of funding to people of color
organizations has trended downward. As GFTA does not specifically aim to fund
peopleof colororganizations,orthose thatserveother underrepresentedgroups,
the variation in the percentage of funding to these groups is based on the overall
application and grant award process. GFTA does not have specific information on
why the percentage of funding to people of color organizations has trended
downwardinthepast6years.TheBoardofSupervisorsmaywishtorequestGFTA
tofurtherevaluatethesefundingtrends,andmaywishtoconsiderpolicychanges
toaddressthesetrends.
The purpose of the Art Commissions Cultural Equity Grants (CEG) initiative is to
fund diverse individuals and organizations through its grant programs. According
to both GFTA and CEG staff, there is not a formal program in place to provide
people of color organizations with initial funding through CEG, and then to
graduate them to the GFTA program, although staff from CEG and GFTA meet
once a month to discuss grantees and potential ways that the two programs can
worktogether.ThereisalsooverlapbetweenCEGandGFTAgrantees.Onaverage
48 percent of art organizations receiving CEG grant recipients also received GFTA
grantfundsfrom2009through2013.
Inaddition to GFTAandCEGgrants, severalCity departmentsfundartsprograms,
totaling approximately $75.1 million in FY 201314. No City entity is responsible
for tracking funding for arts programs Citywide, although this information could
beusefultotheBoardofSupervisorsduringtheannualbudgetreview.Therefore,
the Board of Supervisors may wish to request the Arts Commission to track and
report on City departments arts programs as part of the annual budget review,
includingthetypesofprograms,amountoffunding,andfundingsource.
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page18

APPENDIX

ClassificationsAssignedtoOrganizationsbyCategory

pDANCE
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
AbadaCapoeira Latino
AnneBluethenthalandDancers Women
AsianAmericanDancePerformances Asian
BailesFlamencos
BayAreaCelebratesNationalDanceWeek
CaliforniaContemporaryDance
Capacitor
CenterspaceDanceFoundation
ChhandamChhitreshDasDance Asian
ChineseCulturalProductions Asian
ChineseFolkDanceAssociation Asian
CircuitNetwork
CompanyChaddick
Contraband
DanceAction
DanceBayArea
DanceBrigade Women
DanceThroughTime
Danceart,Inc.
DancersGroup
DeborahSlaterDanceTheater Women
DellaDavidsonCompany Women
EpiphanyProductions Women
FlyawayProductions Women
Footwork
JaniceGarrett&Dancers Women
JessCurtisGravityPhysicalEntertainment
JoeGoodePerformanceGroup
KateFoleyCompany Women
KhadraInternationalFolkBallet
KulintangArts Asian
Kunststoff
LawrencePechDanceCompany
LEVYdance
LilyCaiChineseDanceCompany Asian
Lines AfricanAmerican
MacFarland/WhistlerDanceArtCompany
MargaretJenkinsDanceCo Women
MarkFoehringerDanceProject
NaLeiHuluIKaWekiu Asian
NevaRussianDanceEnsemble
ODCSanFrancisco
PalabuniyabnKulintangEnsemble Asian
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page19

DANCE(continued)
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
PearlUbungenDancersandMusicians Asian
PresidioPerformingArtsFoundation
PurpleMoon DanceProject Women
RAWdance
RobertHenryJohnsonDanceCompany AfricanAmerican
RobertMosesKin AfricanAmerican
SanFrancicoBallet
SanFranciscoButohFestival Asian
SanFranciscoEthnicDanceFestival Multiracial
SanFranciscoHipHopFestival Multiracial
ScottWells&Dancers
SmuinBallet
StephenPeltonDanceCompany
Stepology
Summerfest
TheatreFlamenco
WajumbeCulturalInstitution AfricanAmerican
WorldDance
Yaelisa&CaminosFlamencosDanceCo
ZacchoDanceTheatre AfricanAmerican


LITERARYARTS
ORGANIZATION Classification
AuntLuteBooks Women
BooksbytheBay
CenterfortheArtofTranslation
CityArtsandLectures
HarveyMilkInstitute LGBTQ
Litquake
NationalPoetryAssociation
PlayGround
RadarProductions LGBTQ
SanFranciscoBayAreaBookFestival
SanFranciscoCenterfortheBook
SisterSpit LGBTQ
SmallPressTrafficLiteraryArts
TaleSpinnersTheater
ThePlaywrightsFoundation
ThePoetryCenter
YouthSpeaks
ZSpaceStudio
ZYZZYVA
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page20

MEDIA
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
3rdIS.F.InternationalSouthAsianFilmFestival Asian
AmericanIndianFilmFestival AmericanIndian
ArabFilmFestival Arab
ArtistsTelevisionAccess
BayAreaVideoCollection
BerlinandBeyond
CenterforAsianAmericanMedia Asian
CineAccionpersentsFestivalCineLatino Latino
CinemayaatArabFilmFestival Arab
FilmArtsFoundation
Frameline LGBTQ
InternationalLatinoFilmFestival Latino
NationalAsianAmericanTelecommunicationsAssociation Asian
NewAmericanMakers/WomenofVision Women
PersonaGrataProductions
QueerWomenofColorMedia LGBTQ
RoxieTheater
SanFranciscoBlackFilmFestival AfricanAmerican
SanFranciscoCinematheque
SanFranciscoIndependentFilmFestival
SanFranciscoJewishFilmFestival Jewish
SanFranciscoSilentFilmFestival
SocietyforArtPublicationsoftheAmericas Multiracial

MULTIARTS
ORGANIZATION Classification
509CulturalCenter Multiracial
848CommunitySpace
AmericanIndianContemporaryArts AmericanIndian
AsianImprovaRts Asian
AsianPacificIslanderCulturalCenter Asian
Bayview/RuthWilliamsMemorialOperaHouseand
CulturalCenter

AfricanAmerican
BRAVAforwomeninthearts Women
CellSpace
CenterforAfricanandAfricanAmericanArtandCulture AfricanAmerican
CityArtsandLectures
CityCelebration/WorldArtsWest
Counterpulse
CubaCaribe Latino
CulturalOdyssey AfricanAmerican
EthNohTec Asian
Eugene&ElinoreFriendCenterfortheArts Jewish
EurekaTheatreCompany
FirstVoice Asian
Footloose
Footwork
FreshMeatProductions LGBTQ
GenryuArts Asian
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page21

MULTIARTS(continued)
ORGANIZATION Classification
HarveyMilkInstitute LGBTQ
HumanitiesWest
IntersectionfortheArts
IrishArtsFoundation
JewishCommunityCenerofSanFrancisco Jewish
JonSimsCenterfortheArts LGBTQ
KearnyStreetWorkshop Asian
KulintangArts Asian
LifeontheWater
LikhaBayAreaChapter Asian
LunaSea
MargaretJenkinsDanceCompany Women
MissionCulturalCenterforLatinoArts Latino
NationalMaritimeMuseumAssociation
NationalPoetryAssociation
NeighborhoodArtsProgram/SFArtsCommission Multiracial
NewLangtonArts
NewMusicTheater
NoontimeConcerts
NoontimeConcerts
ODCTheater
OldFirstConcerts
Palabuniyan Asian
PaulDresherEnsemble
PearGardenintheWest
PeopleinPlazas
PoetryCenter
QueerCulturalCener LGBTQ
RedPoppyArtHouse
Safehousefortheperformingarts
SanFrancisccoMaritimeNationalParkAssociation
SanFranciscoBandFoundation
SanFranciscoBayAreaBookFestival
SanFranciscoLiveArts
SanFranciscoMaritimeNationalParkAssociation
SanFranciscoPerformances
SlavonicCulturalCenterofSanFrancisco
SocietyforArtPublicationsoftheAmericas Multiracial
SouthofMarketCulturalCenter Multiracial
SternGroveFestivalAssociation
StudioEremos
Theart.re.grup/TheLab
TheCommunityArtsandEducationProgramoftheSan
FranciscoArtsCommission

Multiracial
TheCowellTheatre
TheMarsh
TheatreArtaud
Venue9/Footloose
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page22

MULTIARTS(continued)
ORGANIZATION Classification

WesternAdditionCulturalCenter AfricanAmerican
YoungAudiencesoftheBayArea
ZSpaceStudio
ZYZZYVA

MUSIC
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
AmericanBachSoloists
ARTEA
AsianImprovArts Asian
BayAreaOmniFoundation
BluesandR&BMusicFoundation AfricanAmerican
ChamberMusicSanFrancisco
ClassicalPhilharmonicofSanFrancisco
ComposersInc
CulturalOdyssey AfricanAmerican
CypressStringQuartet
DelSolStringQuartet
DoorDogMusicProductions Multiracial
Earplay
EncuentrodelCantoPopular Latino
EnsembleParallele
GoldenGateMen'sChorus LGBTQ
GoldenGateParkBand
GoldenGatePerformingArts
InstitutoProMusicadeCalifornia Latino
JazzintheCity/SFJazz
JonJangPerformances Asian
KronosQuartet
LesbianGayChorusofSanFrancisco LGBTQ
LocoBlocoDrummingandDanceEnsemble Latino
Magnificat
MelodyofChina Asian
MidsummerMozartFestival
MSA/PeopleinPlazas
MusicatMeyerConcertSeries
NewCenturyChamberOrchestra
NoeValleyChamberMusicSeries
NoontimeConcerts
NorthBeachJazzFestival
OldFirstConcerts
OmniFoundationforthePerformingArts
OtherMinds
PacificChamberSymphony
PalabuniyanKulintangEnsemble Asian
PaulDresherEnsemble
PeopleinPlazas
PhilharmoniaBaroqueOrchesra
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page23

MUSIC (continued)
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
PocketOpera
RovaArts
SanFrancisoGuZhengMusic Society Asian
SFArtsCommission
SFBachChoir
SFBluesFestival
SFBoysChorus
SFChamberOrchestra
SFChamberSingers
SFChamberSymphony
SFChanticleer
SFChoralArtists
SFChoralSociety
SFCivicChorale/ArtsCommission
SFConservatoryofMusic
SFContemporaryMusicPlayers
SFGirlsChorus Women
SFLesbianGayFreedomBand LGBTQ
SFLiveArts
SFLyricOpera
SFOpera
SFSymphony
SFTaikoDojo Asian
sfSound
Sinfonia
SlavyankaChorus
Sukay
TheChamberMusicPartnershipInc.
TheLamplighters
VOLTI
Women'sPhilharmonic Women
WorldMusicatClarion Asian

THEATER
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
42ndstreet
ATravelingJewishTheare Jewish
ActorsTheatre
AfricanAmercanShakespeareCo AfricanAmerican
AfroSoloTheatreCompany AfricanAmerican
AmericanConservatoryTheater
AsianAmericanTheaterCo. Asian
BayAreaTheatreSports
BayviewReportoryTheater AfricanAmerican
CampoSanto Latino
ClimateTheatre
CrowdedFireTheaterCompany
ElTeatrodelaEperanza Latino
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page24

THEATER(continued)
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
ElbowsAkimbo
EncoreTheater
EurekaTheatreCo.
ExitTheatreCo.
FirstVoice
foolsFURY
FratelliBologna
GeorgeCoatesPerformanceWorks
GoldenThreadProductions MiddleEastern
JewishTheatre Jewish
JulianTheater
LaPochaNostra Latino
LobsterTheaterProject
LorraineHansberryTheatre AfricanAmerican
MagicTheatre
MakeACircus
NewConservatoryTheatreCenter
NewPickleFamilyCircus None
PhoenixArtsAssociation
PomoAfroHomos AfricanAmerican
SanFranciscoMimeTroupe
SanFranciscoPlayhouse
SanFranciscoShakespeare Festival
SanFranciscoTheaterFestival
SanFranciscoTheaterProject
ShadowlightProductions Asian
SOON3
TaleSpinnersTheater
TeatrongTanan Asian
TheCuttingBallTheater
TheaterBayArea
TheaterRhinoceros LGBTQ
TheatreofYugen Asian
ThickDescription
TravellingJewishTheatre Jewish
VaudevilleNouveau
WorkingWomen'sFestival Women
ZCollective
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page25

VISUALARTS
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
AfricanAmericanHistoricalandCulturalSociety AfricanAmerican
AmericanIndianContemporaryArts AmericanIndian
AmericanIndianFilmFestival AmericanIndian
ArtistsGuildofSanFrancisco
ArtSpan/OpenStudiosof SanFrancisco
BlackRockFoundation
CaliforniaCollegeoftheArts
CaliforniaCraftsMuseum
CaliforniaHistoricalSociety
CappStreetProject
CartoonArtMuseum
ChineseCultureFoundation Asian
ChineseHistoricalSocietyofAmerica Asian
CineAccion Latino
CityGuides
ContemporaryJewishMuseum Jewish
CraftandFolkArtMuseum
CreativityExplored
Exploratorium
EyeGallery Women
FilmArtsFoundation
FoundationforArtinCinema
Frameline LGBTQ
FriendsofPhotography
GaleriadelaRaza Latino
GLBTHistoricalSociety LGBTQ
GrayAreaFoundationfortheArts
InternationalChildren'sArtMuseum
JewishMuseumofSF Jewish
LaRazaGraphicsCenter Latino
MagnesMuseum Jewish
MultiImageShowcase
MuseoItaloAmericano
MuseumofCityofSF
MuseumofCraftandFolkArt
MuseumofPerformanceandDesignformerlySanFrancisco
PerformingArtLibrary

NamesProjectFoundation LGBTQ
NationalAsianAmericanTelecommunicationsAssociation Asian
NationalJapaneseAmericanHistoricalSociety Asian
NewAmericanMakers/VideoFreeAmerica
NewLangtonArts
NorthernCaliforniaWomeninFilm Women
PersonaGrataProductions
PrecitaEyesMuralArtsCenter Latino
RootDivision
SanFranciscoArchitecturalHeritage
SanFranciscoArtInstitute
SanFranciscoCamerawork
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page26

VISUALARTS(continued)
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
SanFranciscoMuseumandHistoricalSociety
SanFranciscoMuseumofCraft+Design
SanFranciscoPerformingArtsLibrary&Museum
SanFrancscoMuseumofModern
SFArtInstitute
SFArtspace
SFCamerawork
SFCinematique
SFFilmSociety
SFJewishFilmFestival Jewish
SFJewishMuseum Jewish
SFMuseumandHistoricalSociety
SFMuseumofModernArt
SFPerformingArtsLibrary&Museum
SocietyforArtsPublicationsoftheAmericas Multiracial
SouthernExposure
TheMexicanMuseum Latino
VisualAidArtistsforAIDSRelief

CELEBRATIONSANDPARADES
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
AlohaFestival Asian
AlohaFestivalPacificIslandersCulturalAssociation Asian
AsianHeritageStreetCelebration Asian
CaliforniaDragonBoatAssociation Asian
CarnavalSanFrancisco/MissionNeighborhoodCenters Latino
CastroStreetFair LGBTQ
CherryBlossomFestival Asian
ChineseNewYearFestival&Parade Asian
CincodeMayo Latino
ColumbusDayCelebration
ComedyDay
ElGritoCeremony Latino
FestivaloftheSea
FiestaontheHill Latino
FilipinoAmericanArtsExposition Asian
FolsomStreetFair LGBTQ
GreekCulturalDayCelebration
IsraelinthePark Jewish
JuneteenthFestival AfricanAmerican
KoreanDayFestivalandParade Asian
MakingWaves/SFMusicFestival
MemorialDayCeremony
MinSokFestival Asian
MissionEconomicandCulturalAssociation(MECA) Latino
MLKBirthdayCelebration AfricanAmerican
MoonFestival Asian
NihonmachiStreetFair
ParolLanternFestivalandParade Asian
Budget and LegislativeAnalystsOffice
MemotoSupervisorMar
March18,2014
Page27

CELEBRATIONSANDPARADES(continued)
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
PhilippinesFiestaIslandsFairandExpo Asian
Pistahan
RussianFestival
SamoanFlagDay Asian
SanFranciscoChinatownAutumnMoonFestival Asian
SanFranciscoJuneteenth
SanFranciscoPride LGBTQ
SanFranciscoYouthArtsFestival
SFChinatownAutumnMoonFestival Asian
SFDykeMarch LGBTQ
SFLGBTParade LGBTQ
SFmaritimeNationalParkAssociation
SFYouthArtsFestival
StPatrick'sDayParade
TenderloinTetFestival LGBTQ
TheThirdStreetFair AfricanAmerican
Veterans'DayParade
VietnameseLunarNewYear Asian

TOURISTSUPPORT
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
BarbaryCoastTrail
BayAreaCelebratesNationalDanceWeek
CityGuides
CompassCommunityServices
FoundationforSF'sArchitecturalHeritage
FriendsofRecreationandParks
InternationalDiplomacyCouncil
InternationalVisitorsCenter
KPOOFMRadio Black
KQEDFMFogCityRadio
PerformingArtsServices
PrecitaEyesMuralArtsCenter Latino
RedwoodEmpireAssociation
SailSanFrancisco
SFArchitecturalHeritage
TheatreBayArea
Traveler'sAidSocietyofSF
USOofNorthernCA

CULTURALCENTERS
ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION
BayviewOperaHouseRuthWilliamMemorialTheater AfricanAmerican
AfricanAmericanArtandCultureComplex AfricanAmerican
SouthofMarketCulturalCenter MultiRacial
MissionCulturalCenterforLatinoArts Latino