CFHF 35 - files.haatx.com

3BRAZORIA � CHAMBERS � FORT BEND � GALVESTON � HARRIS � LIBERTY � MONTGOMERY � WALLER

CENTER FOR HOUSTON’S FUTURE,

T

IN ADDITION TO CORPORATE, FOUNDATION AND INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTORS

FROM THROUGHOUT THE EIGHT-COUNTY REGION, CENTER FOR HOUSTON’S FUTURE

THANKS THE FOLLOWING FOR THEIR GENEROUS SUPPORT OF THE

COMMUNITY INDICATOR PROGRAM:

2007 / An Environment Indicator Report

2009 / Air Quality, Parks & Trails, Trees

2010 / Water Quality, Water Supply & Green Buildings

2012 / Human Capital Development and Education:

Early Childhood, K-12, Workforce Preparedness

2013 / Healthy Communities

2014 / Arts & Cultural Heritage

ARTS

&CULTURAL

Huffington Foundation

MD Anderson Foundation

Every year, Center for Houston’s Future publishes a Community Indicator Report on an issue critical to the region’s competitiveness and sustainability.By selecting and featuring the most critical Indicators for the issue under study,we hope to provide public policymakers, business and civic leaders – as well asthe general public – with a report card on our performance as a region. Eachreport strives to capture longitudinal trends and challenges that affect the Houstonregion, as well as regional comparability within Texas and around the nation.These studies aim to bring insight and energy to the problems and opportunitiesthat we face as a region.

Regional Nine Letter / page 2

Acknowledgements / page 4

Executive Summary / page 6

An Urban Masterpiece, Never Finished / page 8

Indicator Overview & Definitions / page 10

Cultural Organizations / page 12Cultural Organizations Per Capita / page 14Cultural and Ethnic Awareness Organizations / page 16Number of Millennial Cultural Organizations / page 18Density / page 19

Funding for the Arts / page 22Spending by Cultural Organizations / page 24State Appropriations / page 26Sources of Revenue/Support / page 28Distribution of Resources Among Cultural Organizations / page 30

People and Jobs / page 32Regional Employment of Artists / page 34Artist Earnings / page 36Characteristics of Region’s Artists / page 38Higher Education Degrees / page 40

Topics for Further Study / page 42Limits To Access and ConnectivityArts Education, Creative Learning and Innovation

The Challenge Ahead / page 43

Appendix & References / page 44

Bibliography & Further Reading / page 46

Donors / page 48

HERITAG

E2014

[CONTENTS]

5BRAZORIA � CHAMBERS � FORT BEND � GALVESTON � HARRIS � LIBERTY � MONTGOMERY � WALLER2014 ARTS & CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMUNITY INDICATOR REPORT CENTER FOR HOUSTON’S FUTURE The Region’s Think Tank4

DEAR FRIENDS,

With this report, Center for Houston’s Future continues to provide a valuable resource on how the Houston region stacks

up on competitiveness and sustainability. The 2014Arts and Cultural Heritage Community Indicator Report is a peer-

reviewed assessment for the region that establishes metrics on the robustness and vitality of its arts-and-culture scene.

The publication is an excellent tool to facilitate good public policy decisions by making reliable longitudinal data available.

Center for Houston’s Future has produced this report through extensive collaboration with dozens of regional cultural

leaders. The indicators offer a snapshot of where the Houston eight-county region stands in critical areas. Determining

the status of arts and culture in the region, we can begin to appreciate their importance not only for the economy, but

for fostering a creative environment in which artists and non-artists alike can thrive.

The 2014Arts and Cultural Heritage Community Indicator Report is the sixth publication in a series intended to help

measure progress over time in key areas. Since 2007, the Center’s benchmark studies have covered, among other

topics, healthy communities, human capital development and education, air quality, green buildings, parks and trails,

trees, water quality, water supply, and resource use.

By highlighting our region’s many successes, along with the critical areas that need increased effort, the Center’s

annual Community Indicators Report serves as the basis for collaboration to further the Houston region as a top global

community in which to work and live.

Sincerely,

Annise Parker Ed Emmett Alan B. SadlerMayor of Houston Harris County Judge Montgomery County Judge

Craig McNair Jimmy Silvia Mark HenryLiberty County Judge Chambers County Judge Galveston County Judge

E.J. King Robert Hebert Glenn BeckendorffBrazoria County Judge Fort Bend County Judge Waller County Judge

ARTS

&CULTURAL

HERITAG

E2014[LETTER]


PEER REVIEW

Terri Bieber, Executive Director, ARTreachCarroll Parrott Blue, Research Professor, University of Houston; Executive Director, The Dawn Project Julie Farr, Executive Director, Houston Center for Contemporary Craft

Rick Ferguson, Executive Director, Houston Film CommissionDean Gladden, Managing Director, Alley TheatreJonathon Glus, President & CEO, Houston Arts AllianceAndrew Huang, President, Houston Downtown AllianceSheryl Kolasinski, COO, Menil CollectionPerryn Leech, Managing Director, Houston Grand OperaRich Levy, Executive Director, Inprint HoustonSteve Roddy, Founder & Director, Houston Children’s ChorusSarah Rothenberg, Artistic & General Director, Da CameraSusanne Theis, Programming Director, Discovery GreenSusan Young, President, South Main Alliance

POLICY COMMITTEE

Nancy Allen, Community Volunteer Dan Bellow, President, Jones Lang LasalleLeslie Blanton, Community VolunteerJames Calaway, President, Calaway Interests

Tony Diaz, Director of Intercultural Initiative, Lone Star CollegeJim Granato, Director, Hobby Center for Public PolicyJoe Havel, Director, Glassell SchoolBrenda Hellyer, Ed.D., Chancellor, San Jacinto College DistrictMolly Hubbard, University Art Director, Rice University;

Commissioner, Texas Commission on the Arts Anne Lamkin Kinder, Community VolunteerShauna Johnson-Clark, Head of Employment and Labor, Fulbright & Jaworski, LLP

Stephen Klineberg, Ph.D., Professor, Rice University; Co-Director, Kinder Institute for Urban Research

Mary Lawler, Executive Director, Avenue CDCJim Lester, President & CEO, Houston Advanced Research Center

John Mendelsohn, Director, Khalifa Institute for Personalized Cancer Therapy; Past President, MD Anderson Cancer Center

Nan Morris, Director, Midstream Gulf of Mexico, BPVance Muse, Director of Communications, Menil CollectionGreg Robertson, Chief Advancement Officer, Houston Grand OperaJuanita Romans, Principal, TRG Healthcare SolutionsLeroy Shafer, VP & COO, Houston Livestock Show & RodeoIda Stinson, Environmental Manager, KBRJeff Taebel, Director of Community and Environmental Planning, Houston-Galveston Area CouncilAnne Taylor, Regional Managing Partner, Mid-America, Deloitte LLPSixto Wagan, Director, University of Houston Center for Arts LeadershipDancie Ware, Owner, Dancie Perugini Ware Public Relations

FOCUS GROUPS AND INTERVIEWS

Reginald Adams, President & CEO, Museum of Cultural Arts HoustonSharon Adams, COO, Houston FirstMichelle Barnes, Executive Director, Community Artists CollectiveSandra Bernhard, Director, HGOcoCarroll Parrott Blue, Research Professor, University of Houston; Executive Director, The Dawn Project Minnette Boesel, Special Assistant to the Mayor on Cultural Affairs, City of Houston Mayor’s OfficeBrad Bucher, Philanthropist; Trustee, Museum of Fine Arts, HoustonKaty Butterwick, Board Member, Houston History Association; Community Leadership Program Officer, St. Luke’s Health System Holly Clapham-Rosenow, VP of Marketing, Greater Houston Convention and Visitor Bureau

Joe Cooper, Former Director of Tourism, Houston FirstSusan Criner, Board Member, CAMH; Owner, Gulf Coast EntertainmentRick Ferguson, Executive Director, Houston Film CommissionJennifer Garza, Director of Membership, MFAHJonathon Glus, President & CEO, Houston Arts AllianceGuy Hagstette, Project Consultant, Buffalo Bayou Partnership; Past President & Park Director, Discovery GreenKaty Hays, Chief Grant Officer, Brown FoundationDon Henderson, Committee Chair, GHP Culture Tourism Collaborative Committee; President & CEO, DJH ConsultingAndrew Huang, President, Houston Downtown AllianceRob Jackson, Director of Government and Community Relations, Houston FirstPat Jasper, Director of Folk Art, Houston Arts AllianceJill Jewett, Project Manager, Independent Art Collaboration; Midtown Arts & Theater Center HoustonSheryl Kolasinski, Menil CollectionMatthew Lennon, Director of Civic and Public Art, Houston Arts Alliance Rich Levy, Executive Director, Inprint HoustonDebbie McNulty, Program Officer of Arts & Culture and Human Services, Houston EndowmentMarsha Wilson Rappaport, Commissioner – Galveston, Texas Commission on the ArtsTrish Rigdon, Executive Director, Houston Cinema Arts SocietySteve Roddy, Founder & Director, Houston Children’s ChorusLeroy Shafer, VP & COO, Houston Livestock Show & RodeoNancy Sims, Senior Vice President, Pierpont CommunicationsRebecca Udden, Artistic Director, Main Street TheaterAlice Valdez, Director, MECASixto Wagan, Director, University of Houston Center for Arts LeadershipDancie Ware, Owner, Dancie Perugini Ware Public RelationsMary Lee Webeck, Director of Education, Holocaust Museum HoustonChristine West, Executive Director, Lawndale Art CenterEvan Wildstein, Programs Manager, HGOcoJoe Wilson, Director of Grants, Houston Arts Alliance; MusiqaSusan Young, President, South Main Alliance

Center for Houston’s Future, The Region’s Think Tank, is proud

to present this 2014 Arts and Cultural Heritage Community Indicator Report.

We owe a debt of gratitude to the more than 50 professionals, and their organizations, who generously gave their time and talent by participating in interviews and focus groups as

well as conducting peer reviews for the accuracy and integrity of the report.

The future of the region will be healthier, more prosperous – and brighter – because of their efforts.

[ACKNOWLEDGMENTS]SPECIAL THANKS TO:

Gwendolyn Goffe, 2014 Center for Houston’s Future Fellow

CENTER FOR HOUSTON’S FUTURE COMMUNITY INDICATOR PROGRAM

Catherine Clark Mosbacher, President and CEOJohn Wilburn, Director of Strategic InitiativesAnn Shaw, Director of External Affairs

Steven Scarborough, Manager of Strategic InitiativesChristy VanZandt, Communications CoordinatorIsabelle Soifer, Strategic Initiatives Intern

ALSO THANKS TO:Sandra Wegmann, Nanette Van Gend, Chuck Thomas,Katherine Stevens, Michelle Lo, and Dante Saldana II

From 2000-2010,

expenditures from cultural organizations

grew by 65% ($227 million)

There are 532 cultural organizations

dispersed across the region’s 10,062

square miles (0.52 establishments

per sq. mile)

Houston’s 31,870 artists constitute 1.1% of the region’s total workforce (compared to an average of 1.9% in comparable regions)

37.4% of the region’s artists are ethnic minorities

Harris County hosts 76% of

the nine-county region’s cultural organizations

CULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS BY DISCIPLINE

34.4%

9.4%4.1%

19.4%

12.6%

8.6%

PerformingArts

MuseumsFairs

Arts & Culture

ArtsSupport

Cultural & EthnicAwareness

40% of the region’s cultural organizations did not exist before the year 2000

Contributions to the arts increased by

$142M over the past decade — 88% of that amountwent to just 27 organizations

$

Y2K 8.94 cultural organizations per 100,000

residents in the Houston region


Here in Houston we create andcelebrate arts and cultural heritage the same way we do somany other things – with boldstrokes, rambunctious energy,and great good humor. We’reparticularly proud to brag on our mostprominent and celebrated institutions,crowing (correctly) that we’re one of thefew cities in the United States thatboasts permanent resident companiesacross the major performing artsdisciplines – symphony orchestra, grandopera, theater, and ballet. Not to mentionexceptional fine arts museums. So yes,we’ve got good reason to toot ourtrumpets. These institutions have a storied history. They’re well-respectedand well-reviewed throughout the countryand around the globe.

Of course, when we consider Houston’sarts and cultural heritage in broad terms,we’re not all about the high-brow. Our folkand vernacular traditions encompasseverything from neighborhood renditionsof free expression such as the Beer CanHouse to the Houston Livestock Showand Rodeo. The rodeo, in fact, may bethe single largest ambassador of theHouston region’s cultural identity. A recent editorial in the Houston Chroniclenoted that the rodeo has become “sosuccessful that it draws more visitorsthan all the people in the entire city ofHouston” while still engaging a diverseand burgeoning hometown population.The Chronicle identified the rodeo and the Houston Grand Opera as

[EXECUTIVE SUMMARY]

exemplars of organizations that have “embraced the obligation to … reflect thecommunity.”

Indeed, our major institutions do an admirable job of connecting with theHouston region’s diverse constituencies.And all those varied communities havegenerated a fertile artistic and culturaluniverse that reflects our manifold cultures and backgrounds, as well asour gloriously colorful future.

So when we decided to study the Houstonregion’s arts and cultural heritage, weknew we’d be working from a richpalette. We also knew this topic wouldpresent particular challenges, unlikethose encountered in earlier reports.The arts by nature capture a subjectiveversion of our world, and for that reasonprove resistant to quantification. In theabsence of hard data, the temptation isto talk about what we like or don’t like.But our aim here is not to produce aqualitative review of our arts and cultural scene. Nor is it to assess theeconomic or social impact of arts andculture on our region. Our aim is to cometo some understanding of how well the greater Houston region cultivates, encourages, and nourishes artistic andcultural expression, particularly in termsof financial sustainability.

The Arts & Cultural Heritage CommunityIndicator Report focuses on threeregional topics – cultural organizations,funding for the arts, and people

and jobs. The report strives to capturelongitudinal trends and challenges withcomparisons to competitor regions withinTexas and around the nation. Within thisreport, we selected individual indicatorsfollowing a literature review, and consultationwith dozens of arts and cultural leadersthroughout the region via interviews,focus groups, and peer review meetings.The chosen indicators reflect both thepriorities voiced by these leaders, as well as practical considerations related to the availability of the existingdata.

Several points within this studystand out:

The Houston region benefits from an exceptionally generous body of supporters,and these supporters have stepped up their giving during challenging times:

u When tracking gains in total revenue among Houston’s arts and cultural nonprofits, contributions increased by more than 80 percent over the past decade.

The bulk of that support has gone to thebiggest, most well established institutions: u Nearly 88 percent of the increased contributions

went to just 27 organizations, representing five percent of the total number of arts and cultural nonprofits.

The Houston region offers fertile groundfor ambitious innovators: u More than 40 percent of the arts and cultural

organizations here did not exist before the year 2000.

These new organizations struggle withfunding, particularly compared to otherparts of the nation. Nationally, close to athird of cultural organizations are new(founded since 2000), and bring in lessthan one fifth of the revenue. u In the Houston region, these new outfits

account for 40 percent of our arts and cultural institutions, yet account for only 10 percent of the region’s total revenue accrued within the sector.

The region’s much heralded ethnicdiversity is more and more reflected in itsarts and cultural establishments. u Houston’s “ethnic and cultural awareness”

nonprofits increased in number by 82 percent

between 2000 and 2011, and now represent 13percent of the region’s cultural organizations.

These organizations also strugglewith funding.u ough representing 13 percent of the region’s

arts nonprofits, cultural and ethnic awareness organizations account for less than 2 percent of the total revenue secured by the sector as a whole.

After adjusting for cost of living,u artists have more earning power in Houston

than in any comparable region except Los Angeles.

Artists are underrepresented innearly every occupational categorywhen compared to the national average.

u For example, fine artists are nearly 50 percent less prevalent in the Houston region than in comparable regions.

So this report tells a story of growthand abundance, but an abundancethat does not benefit as many withinour region as it might. Houston is agreat place for artists to get started, orto be at the top, but without any clearpath from the bottom to the top, people willmove on. We hope our work stimulatesprovocative questions and spirited conversation about how to make ourartistic and cultural bounty available toall of our residents.

Our aim is to come to some understanding of how well the greater Houston region cultivates, encourages,

and nourishes artistic and cultural expression.


Houston had a newspaper in its firstmonth and a theater

in its first year. By 1839,there were three

newspapers and two theater companies. This was also the year

that the gala took hold asa major fundraising tool to “pull the snags out of

Buffalo Bayou.”Philanthropy provided another leg ofthe stool. Ima Hogg, daughter of the firstTexas-born governor and founder of manyimportant charities and institutions inart and public health, noted, “Houstonwas lucky. The first people whogot rich here, in the days longbefore oil, were nice people.They gave their money toschools, hospitals, charities,parks, the library, the arts.They set the pattern. This iswhat Houstonians do oncethey get a little money.”

Miss Ima and her generouspeers left the Houston region a

rich legacy, a legacy that has had animpact beyond traditional notions ofarts and culture. Dr. Charles F. Jones,former head of Humble Oil, in a 1968address to the Houston Chamber ofCommerce, stated, “The presence of a sound cultural environment was

BY GWENDOLYN H. GOFFE

Civic leaders, business executives,artists and the general public whocall the Houston region home confront each day an area that remains in a continual state of becoming. As Oveta Culp Hobbyonce quipped, “I think I’ll like Houston ifthey ever get it finished.” There’s somuch to finish, from a modern transitsystem to development of our urbancore to the growth of the arts and cultural sector, just to name a disparate few. The ongoing efforts in each of these areas are sincere,well-meaning, engaging, frequently visionary, and most often insular, giventhe region’s enormity.

The city proper sprawls over more than600 square miles, and the Houstonregion rolls from the Gulf Coast to thePiney Woods. The area is vast (morethan 10,000 square miles – largerthan New Jersey), with a populationtopping 6 million and growing. Giventhe enormous size and ethnic diversityof Houston and the surrounding counties,an ongoing question is how to achieveaccess for all despite geographic location and/or socio-economic circumstances.

As noted earlier, all of our major arts andcultural organizations have significantoutreach programs while maintainingthe highest standards of presentation.Smaller organizations have a high levelof formation in the region as well. Yet

the broad middle that is found in manycities is virtually non-existent and little-supported within our region. Artistscan make a living wage here, but arewoefully underrepresented in almostevery category of arts and cultural employment when compared to thenational norm.

All of which raises challenging questionsfor our region: How can the “creative class”become an important consideration inlocal economic development policy?Are more advanced degree programsnecessary to foster the missing mid-level noted above? How do weconnect the dots? How can we assure that arts and cultural heritagecommunities grow to their fullregional potential?

From i t s incept ion ,Houston (and certainlyGalveston, particularlyprior to the 1900storm) counted on artsand culture as an important leg in thestool of stability andgrowth. Many of the earlyimmigrants to Texas camefrom New York, New England,and Europe. Visitors to Houstonat the time were amazed by the contrast between the fairly primitivehouses and the quality of life inside.

instrumental in attracting the MannedSpacecraft Center to Houston and willbecome increasingly more importantin the future.” He went on to say thatthe demands on society place a strongburden on business leaders to become“more fully aware individuals,” andthat involvement with arts and culturecan help add “dimension and under-standing to people.” Forty-six yearslater, the intersection of arts and culturewith the entrepreneurial, medical, andscientific communities is an idealsought by such esteemed institutionsas Rice University, the University ofHouston, and the Texas Medical Center.

In an echo of Dr. Jones’ remarks, we hear a lot today about what thecreative class can do for an urban region’s economic development. In hisintroduction to Creative Communities:Art Works in Economic Development(Brookings Institution Press, 2013),Michael Rushton asserted that “the

arrived in Houston in 1898 he found acity that was struggling to hold onto third place in Texas, behind SanAntonio and Dallas. He decided thatHouston should be the biggest city inTexas and set out to make it so. Nowwe are the fourth largest city in the nation and a city with no ethnic majority.The opportunity to become more than big is the next challenge. Onceagain, Houston can lead the way. Theopportunity is at hand for the arts andcultural heritage sector to hone its resources and to become a powerfultransformative tool for the future.

u Gwendolyn H. Goffe, former Associate Director, Investment and Finance, at the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston (MFAH), came to this project as a Center Fellow, following her retirement after 25 years at the MFAH in June 2013. Goffe provided direction and primary oversight of this report.

scale of the cultural sector matters in that a larger cultural scene and potential audience results in increasedpossibilities for cultural diversity andspecialization. As the cultural sectorand its audiences grow, the potentialfor sustaining more esoteric arts appealing to a smaller part of the localpopulation is enhanced.”

Clearly the “creative class” cannotstand alone in attracting businessesand residents. Schools, safety, job opportunities, and transportation areimportant considerations. But Houstonshould not shrink from the challenge.As a region that defies typical notionsof urban form, why shouldn’t we figureout how to more fully develop and integrate our arts and cultural heritagewith every other aspect of life here?

Houston has been a leader throughoutits history and has fostered leadershipin myriad areas. When Jesse Jones

AN URBAN MASTERPIECE, NEVER FINISHED

Ima Hogg*

*Courtesy of Museum of Fine Arts, Houston


Nonetheless, every organization and individualinvolved in the arts – regardless of mission, age,size, talent or population served – ultimatelyrequires adequate financial resources to continue– and expand – their work. It is no surprise,then, that financial constraints rank high amongthe many challenges faced by members of thearts community, but the availability of moneyis not the sole factor that affects a region’s artsscene. The indicators outlined in this work describe not just the financial aspect of artisticand cultural activity throughout our region, but also the prevalence of opportunities andsupport systems that allow for a rich culturalcommunity.

Increasing evidence attests to the integral role that a robust arts-and-culture scene playsin economic competitiveness, community development, quality of life, and social cohesion. Our colleagues at Rice University’sKinder Institute for Urban Research and atHouston Arts Alliance have provided in-depthassessments of the arts’ social effects and economic impact to the region in their 2011and 2012 reports, respectively. The data presented in this report are intended to helpcomplete the picture, assessing the underlyinghealth of the region’s arts community and thefinancial viability of cultural production here.In short, the economic impact on the artsrather than the economic impact of the arts.

When examined over time and against othermetropolitan areas, these measures also lendinsight into the difference between our region’scapacity to support the arts and that of our regional competitors. Securing reliable sourcesof funding, attracting high-quality creativeworkers, and addressing infrastructure needsare what enable a region to develop a robustcultural identity. Improvement in these areasis of particular concern in communities (suchas ours) predicted to experience sustained,rapid growth over the foreseeable future. As Houston's population increases, the artscommunity will require greater support tomeet the heightened demand for culturalprogramming throughout the region.

Most cultural organizations in Houston arestructured as nonprofit organizations. For thepurposes of this report, “cultural organizations”are taken to mean nonprofit arts and culturalorganizations as defined in the National Taxonomy of Exempt Entities (NTEE) systemused by the IRS. The use of the phrases“cultural organizations,” “arts and cultural organizations,” “arts nonprofits,” and “arts establishments” throughout the report all referto this one definition. Likewise, mentions of“arts and culture” or “the arts” refer to the arrayof nonprofit organizations that have been classified as arts and cultural organizationsunder the NTEE system.

[INDICATOR OVERVIEW AND DEFINITIONS]

The indicators are intended to track Houston’s progress over time, as well as how thearea compares to similar regions. For this report, 13 competitor MSAs have been selected for analysis: Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, Miami-FortLauderdale-Pompano Beach, New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, Pittsburgh, San Antonio-New Braunfels, San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, and San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont. Throughout the report, these regions are referredto by the primary city that anchors them (e.g., “Los Angeles” for Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana).

Quantitative assessments of the arts often fail to capture themagic or the essence of culturalexpression and participation.

In addition, the data presented here are regional in scope. Unless specifically notedotherwise, the indicators for Houston (as wellas the other communities under comparison)pertain to areas designated by the U.S. Census Bureau’s Metropolitan Statistical Area(MSA) system of classification. The Houston-

Sugar Land-Baytown MSA currently includesnine counties: Harris, Montgomery, Liberty,Chambers, Galveston, Brazoria, Fort Bend,Waller, and Austin. References in the report to“Greater Houston”, the “Houston metro”,“Houston”, and the “Houston region” all refer tothe Houston MSA.


In many arts disciplines (such as visual and performing arts, historical and museum organizations, and arts education), nonprofit status is the norm. Most are charitable organizationsunder section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Determiningthe number of nonprofit cultural organizations can thus potentially indicate the extent of cultural participation by bothHouston artists and the general public.

The data on nonprofit cultural organizations presented in this report were obtained by analyzing National Center for CharitableStatistics (NCCS) Core Files, which derive from the informationsubmitted by nonprofits that file an IRS Form 990 or Form 990-N,from fiscal years 2000-2011. Form 990 filers represent fewerthan half of all registered nonprofits, but constitute all nonprofitcultural organizations with gross revenues over $25,000. Onlydata from organizations classified by the National Taxonomy of Exempt Entities (NTEE) in major group “A,” B70, C41, D50, and N52 have been used in this report’s indicators. NTEEcodes are used by both the IRS and NCCS to classify nonprofitorganizations, and the set of NTEE codes used to perform the indicators analysis is sourced from similar studies conductedpreviously by organizations such as the Urban Institute and Americans for the Arts.

For the purposes of this report, “Total Spending” is taken to mean the total expenditures for all arts and culture nonprofit organizations within a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) duringa given fiscal year. Certain figures have then been converted toa per capita measure using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The vigor of the arts rests in many ways on the hundreds of nonprofit organizations thatpresent and organize arts programs acrossmyriad disciplines in the Houston community.

2014 ARTS & CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMUNITY INDICATOR REPORT CENTER FOR HOUSTON’S FUTURE The Region’s Think Tank16 17BRAZORIA � CHAMBERS � FORT BEND � GALVESTON � HARRIS � LIBERTY � MONTGOMERY � WALLER

INDICATOR Cultural Organizations

Per CapitaAccording to the Urban Institute, the first indicator of an artcommunity’s vitality is the presence of nonprofit cultural organizations, as they are the “key catalysts for both amateur andprofessional arts practice and collaborate with a range of arts and non-arts organizations.”i

Nationally, the total number of organizations in these categories increased from about 75,000 in 1999 to 113,000 in 2010. It is worthnoting that fewer than half of these organizations file an IRS Form 990in any given year. The most likely reason that some do not file is thatthey are small. Organizations with less than $25,000 in total revenuesare not required to file Form 990.

With all the attention given to the nonprofit arts in cultural policy and cultural economics, and the special impact of the nonprofit sectoron the arts in recent decades, it is especially significant to show howavailable and accessible nonprofit arts groups are to residents as partof the capacity of the arts in a region. While this indicator does not reflect the composition of the region’s arts groups, it does show the overall breadth of the nonprofit arts sector in a community as experienced by its residents.

How are we doing?As of 2011, there were 556 arts and culture nonprofits filingIRS 990 forms in the Houston region. Performing arts groups

and “arts and culture” organizations(dealing with cultural and ethnic awareness, folk arts, arts education,arts and humanities councils, andcommunity celebrations) comprise thetwo largest subsets of this sum, accounting for 34 percent and 19percent, respectively, of the total figure.

The region has witnessed relativelysustained increases in its number ofnonprofit arts and cultural organizations.From 2000 to 2011, the quantity ofthese organizations increased by

68 percent overall and outpaced the rate of population growth (28percent) over the same period. Together, this amounts to a 27.8 percent level of growth in the per capita number of cultural organizations. In relation to the population, the region advanced fromhaving 7.00 arts and cultural organizations per 100,000 residentsin 2000 to 8.94 arts and cultural organizations per 100,000 by 2010.

How do we compare?Among its regional peers, in both the absolute number of cultural organizations per 100,000 residents and the increase in that measureover time, Houston lags behind the middle of the pack. After totallingthe number of cultural organizationsand dividing by population, our regionranked 9th for number of cultural organizations per capita for fiscal year2010.

The data reveal that Houston alsoranks 9th among the 13 selectedcomparison regions in terms of thegrowth in number of cultural organizations. While Houston’s rapidly increasing population plays a substantial role in depressing its results in this per capita measure, regions with similar if not higher ratesof growth still managed to surpassHouston in this category. San Antonio’sperformance in particular outshinesHouston, given that both metro regions experienced nearly the samerate of population growth. San Antonio’sincrease of nearly 63 percent is morethan double Houston’s 27.8 percentincrease in cultural organizations per capita. It is important to note,however, that the large improvementsin this measure for San Diego and SanAntonio primarily reflect the relativelysmall number of cultural organizationspresent in these regions to beginwith – thus boosting the percentagegrowth figure.ii

Number of Cultural Organizations in the Houston Region

Cultural Organizations Per 100,000 Residents (2010)

Increase in Number of Cultural OrganizationsPer Capita (2000-2010)

[ ]

Houston ranks 9th among the 13 selected comparison

regions in terms of the growth in number of cultural

organizations.

SOURCE: NCCS

SOURCE: NCCS


INDICATOR Cultural and Ethnic

Awareness Organizations

As the nation’s fourth most populous city, with more than 90languages spoken in the area, Houston is increasingly celebratedfor its burgeoning diversity, and has been cited as “the shape of thingsto come.” Houston’s current ethnic composition is thought to reflectthe anticipated future diversity of urban and suburban areas in theU.S.iii A recent study by the Greater Houston Convention and VisitorsBureau (GHCVB) measured both internal and external perceptions ofHouston as a travel destination, revealing that Houston “gets rave reviews for diversity.” According to a report released by the Kinder Institute of Urban Research and the Hobby Center for the Study of

Texas, Houston has surpassed cities such as Los Angeles andNew York as the most ethnically diverse metropolitan area inthe United States.

The population of the Houston Metropolitan StatisticalArea increased by approximately 26 percent between2000 and 2010, with Harris County experiencing the largestinflux of new residents of all U.S. counties in 2011 and 2012. In the next 30 years, the region is expected see a population increase of between 2.2 million to upwards of 3.5 million people,with more than 2 million concentrated in Harris County alone.This growth is attributable in nearly equal parts to natural increase and net migration.

Many major and established arts establishments in the region have a substantial commitment to ethnic

diversity in offerings and outreach, and these populations represent a large share of arts and cultural audiences in the region.The following indicator will thus examine the growing number of arts establishments classified as “Cultural and Ethnic Awareness Organizations” in the Houston region, as well as their accessibilityto certain populations. For a city that is both growing and diversifyingrapidly, an increase in the number of cultural organizations servingthe population would provide a solid base for fostering a more robust arts and culture scene. On the other hand, with a higher numberof organizations, constraints on development, such as insufficientand/or fragmented funding, can occur. This could result in a lack ofsustainability in projects and programs, as well as a potential lack ofcoordination among organizations.

How are we doing?While overall growth in the number of cultural organizations in Houstontestifies to the universal appetite for arts and culture in this community(as also observed in metros throughout the U.S. from 2000 to 2010), minority populations may often be overlooked and underserved by artsnonprofits. It remains unclear whether diversity is collectively experiencedamong the region’s inhabitants and, specific to arts and culture, whether ethnic works are represented among available arts platforms. The Center’s focusgroup participants expressed concernthat ethnic arts may only be enjoyedwithin the communities from which theyare born as well as a desire for theseworks to be more broadly marketedand shared throughout the region.

Cultural groups serving lower-income neighborhoods are oftensmall and financially challenged.The National Committee for ResponsivePhilanthropy estimates that, at the national level, three quarters of allcultural groups have budgets under $250,000, indicating “a disparity ofresources available to support different communities’ artistic aspirations.”As such, cultural and ethnic awareness nonprofits represent 13 percentof the region’s arts nonprofits but only account for 1.7 percent of thetotal revenue secured by the region’s arts nonprofits as a whole.

Nevertheless, the data do give reason for some optimism: the numberof Houston’s cultural & ethnic awareness nonprofits increased by 82percent from 2000 to 2011. Such organizations now comprise 13 percentof the total number of arts and cultural nonprofits in the Houston metroarea. The strong growth in this measure suggests that the nonprofitarts sector is conscious of the cultural needs among our region’s diversepopulations, and is taking significant steps toward engaging the region’s inhabitants.

How do we compare?According to the most recent data available on the number of cultural organizations percapita, Houston places 6th out of the 13 selectedcompetitor regions with 1.13 cultural and ethnicawareness organizations per 100,000 residents –just above the group average of 1.12.

Houston, however, has made significant progressin boosting support for the cultural life of its particular ethnic groups over the past decade. In2000, there existed only 0.81 cultural & ethnicawareness nonprofits for every 100,000 residents. By 2010, that figure had risen by 39.5 percent, potentally indicating a growing interest across the region forincreased access to cultural programming.

Cultural and Ethnic Awareness Organizations in

Houston Region

... and is the shape

of things to come.

[ ]

Houston gets rave reviews for diversity...

Cultural and Ethnic AwarenessOrganizations Per 100,000

Residents (2010)

SOURCE: NCCS

SOURCE: NCCS


INDICATOR Number of Millennial

Cultural OrganizationsIt is well known that the number of arts nonprofits grew substantially in the 2000s. Nationally, “millennial” organizations(established after 1999) represent more than 30 percent of all artsnonprofits, providing clear evidence of entrepreneurship in the arts.ivThe youthfulness characterizing numerous cultural organizations mayalso be due in part to Houston’s status as one of the youngest populationsin the nation.v This indicator reveals how much the Houston region’s arts scene has participated in the entrepreneurial growth occurringin communities around the country.

Newer organizations generally take an innovative approach towardtheir specific disciplines, serving as incubators to test new ideas, thoughestablished organizations can also be innovators. Thus, to what extentdo communities favor older institutions over newer? Do they providean environment that encourages or discourages new organizations?

The number of millennial cultural organizations is just part of the“institutional or entrepreneurial” factor in the cultural character of a community. Generally, new organizations have less revenue than established organizations and may have a different revenue profile. Nationally, millennial cultural organizations hold a 19 percent share ofall cultural organizations’ revenues. While close to one-third of culturalorganizations are new, they bring in less than one-fifth of revenue. In Houston, groups under this category hold a 40 percent share of allthe cultural organizations in the region, but they account for only 10percent of the region’s total revenue accrued by the arts.

There are several possible explanations for this difference: millennialorganizations may be more productive and efficient with a smaller infrastructure that needs less support, as well as a potential relianceon the drive of a founder. Or, they may face a very tough competitiveenvironment that makes it difficult to build revenue. These possiblescenarios can be seen in many regions, distinctively characterizing eachof their arts economies.

How do we compare?Among its competitor regions, Houstonranks particularly well in terms of the proportion of its cultural organizationscurrently operating that were foundedafter the year 2000. As of 2010, 220 ofthe total 532 arts and cultural nonprofitsin Houston were established in the year2000 or later. The region places fourth inthis metric behind Los Angles, Atlanta,and San Diego, potentially serving as aproxy to indicate the responsiveness andentrepreneurial nature of the arts community.

INDICATORDensity

Low population density is one of the defining characteristicsof the Houston region and has a significant impact on the artsand culture community. Although the Houston MSA spans 9 counties, 403 of the region’s 532 cultural organizations (76 percent)are situated in Harris County. Those organizations furthermore accountfor 88 percent of the total revenue and 89 percent of the total expenditures for the region’s arts nonprofits as a whole.

Thus, the regional per capita indicators do not illuminate the potentiallyuneven distribution of cultural institutions by county, neighborhood, orcensus tract, nor do they reveal much about the accessibility and affordability of opportunities for cultural expression throughout the region at large. The data presented here demonstrate the extent towhich urban areas host much of the region’s cultural output, as well ashow Houston’s low population density presents challenges for culturalorganizations.

How do we compare?Houston ranks 10th in terms of cultural organizations persquare mile among the 13 competitor regions, and only two ofthe considered regions – San Antonio and Phoenix – possess lowerrates of residents per square mile. Cultural organizations are disadvantaged by a more spread out population, given that thisdispersion presents an accessibility obstacle impacting their ability toattract audiences. Thus, cultural organizations in Houston must contendwith substantial transportation challenges given the huge area.

Cultural Organizations and Population Density Although

the Houston MSA spans

9 counties, 403 of the region’s 532*cultural organizations

(76 percent) are situated in Harris

County.

*Refers to 2010 amount - the most current year with available data.

Establishment Years of Cultural Organizations

[ ] [ ]

REGION CULTURAL PEOPLEORGANIZATIONS PER PER

SQUARE MILE SQUARE MILE

New York 1.89 10,199San Francisco 0.60 2,413 Philadelphia 0.40 2,711 Los Angeles 0.31 2,704 Boston 0.24 1,002Chicago 0.19 1,768 Miami 0.19 2,296 Dallas 0.10 1,110 San Diego 0.09 686Pittsburgh 0.07 441Atlanta 0.05 626Houston 0.05 591San Antonio 0.03 292Phoenix 0.02 288

SOURCE: NCCS



According to a 2013 report by the organization Grantmakersin the Arts, the total public funding for the arts by federal,state, and local governments has increased by 15.6 percentover the past 21 years.While this trend has generally been reflectedin the funding for state and local organizations, the flows“[correspond] to the economic recessions of the early 2000sand the more recent, longer and deeper recession.”vi Thus, in the case of Houston, the funding for arts and cultural organizations has remained rather steady in comparison to itscompetitor regions, displaying an increasingly influential andsupported sector of the region’s economy.

By examining Houston’s current funding of the arts bythe state, the public, and private philanthropy, we can beginto determine each source’s roles in developing a nationallyacclaimed and recognized arts-and-culture scene in Houston.

Despite the impressive gains made by the Houston region’s arts andcultural organizations, the future of public funding of the arts remainsunpredictable. As Grantmakers in the Arts asserts, lower funding bythe NEA and federal cuts may lead to a more challenging fiscal climatefor many services, including the arts.vii Establishing steady sources offunding and support for the arts may influence the opportunities for thegrowth and success of Houston’s nonprofit arts organizations and thenumerous artists who depend on them.

In the following section, we measure the growth of both expenditures and

revenues of nonprofit cultural organizations in the Houston region.


How are we doing?The region’s total arts spending increased by 65 percent from2000 to 2010, rising from $352 million to $579 million –more than doublethe rate of population growth over the same period. The data presentedhere seem to confirm that arts nonprofits in Houston exhibited the same

kind of resiliency during the national recessionthat generally characterized the regionmore broadly. While total arts and culturalspending leveled off from 2008 to 2009,the figures quickly returned to growth bythe end of 2010.

How do we compare?When examined over time from 2000to 2010, the data show that Houston’sper capita arts spending grew only30 percent, in part a reflection of our pronounced population growth over the

same period. Even so, the data indicate that the Houston region’s increasesregarding this measure fall short of the growth achieved by our peersthat have experienced similarly high rates of population increase. Overthe same 2000-2010 timeframe, per capita spending in the arts roseby 42 percent in Miami, 55 percent in Atlanta, 79 percent in Dallas,and 105 percent in San Antonio.

Overall, Houston ranks 12th among competitor regions in terms of growth inper capita arts and cultural spending, ahead of only Pittsburgh and San Diego.

Despite a considerable upsurge in expenditures over the past decade,Houston lags behind many of its competitor regions in this category.Among the 14 regions compared, Houston ranks 9th and trails theaverage arts spending figure of $141 per person by 31 percent, (adifference of roughly $44 per person).

Per capita arts spending in New York, Boston, and San Francisco –regions with some of the most recognizedand established arts and culture destinationsin the country – exceeds Houston’s by more thandouble. To fully appreciate the magnitudeof this disparity, consider that Houstonwould have to maintain its current 65 percentrate of spending growth per decade through2029 just to match San Francisco’s 2010per capita arts spending figure of $254 aperson. However, when excluding thesethree regions, Houston nearly matches theaverage spending amount among the 10 remaining competitors with $98 per person.

Cultural Organizations by Expenditures

INDICATORSpending by Cultural

OrganizationsDefined in this report as the combined expenditures of Houston’s arts and cultural nonprofits by fiscal year, the totalspending measure gauges how much money the region expends on cultural programming and output.

As one of the nation’s fastest-growing cities, Houston has experienceda remarkable degree of economic development over the past decade,and the arts community shared in this increased prosperity. A recentstudy conducted by the Houston Arts Alliance and University of Houstonfound that the economic impact the City of Houston’s creative sectorin 2011 amounted to more than $9.1 billion, outpacing the arts industries inother major cities in Texas.viii The indicator data discussed below donot attempt to gauge the economic impact of cultural institutions, butspending by cultural organizations within Houston serves as a reflectionof the growing influence of the arts and culture organizations in the region.

Cultural Organizations Expenditures Per Capita

(2010)

Total Expenditures for Houston Region's Cultural

Organizations

[ ]Per capita arts

spending in New York,Boston, and

San Francisco – regions with some

of the most recognized and

established arts andculture destinations in the country –

exceeds Houston’s bymore than double.

SOURCE: NCCS

SOURCE: NCCS


INDICATOR State Appropriationsix

Across the nation, state arts agencies play a key role in providing financial and professional support to art organizationsand artists through a variety of programs. Founded in 1965, theTexas Commission on the Arts (TCA) is tasked with providingsupport to arts and cultural organizations as well as increasing the accessibility of the arts for all Texans. TCA’s work predominantly involves reviewing grant requests and awarding funds to Texas’ culturalorganizations – generally accounting for roughly 75 percent of its totalbudget. The TCA currently serves more than 3,500 arts and culturalinstitutions.

Cities and towns formerly received arts funding in the millions of dollars;over the course of the past 12 years, however, the state legislature has massively cut the amount of money allotted to municipalities. Accordingly, state support for non-tourism-related programs such asarts education and community engagement has declined substantially.

It is important to note, however, that the allocation of public monies toarts and culture varies widely from state to state and by the size of the institution. Many regions’ arts funding comes primarily from charitable contributions. Thus, measures of government funding –often thesmallest source of funding – do not in and of themselves give an accurate depiction of arts funding. Nonetheless, many major institutions, including zoos, museums, and performance spaces, aregovernment owned and operated.

How are we doing?The arts endured painful cuts in state funding during Texas’recent fiscal crisis, but the levels of grant money awarded by TCAhave begun to rebound. The state will grant a total of $4.3 million tothe arts during fiscal year 2014, a 53 percent increase from a low of$2.8 million in 2012. In fiscal year 2013, TCA awarded a total of

$705,000 in grant funding to 139 culturalorganizations in the Houston region. Still,current levels of appropriations to the artshave yet to fully recover, given that the stateallocated more than $6.8 million for artsgrants as recently as fiscal year 2010.

Notably, the data show that TCA has respondedto the Texas Legislature’s decision to undomany of 2011’s cuts by opting to increase theamount of funds awarded per grant ratherthan broadening the number of cultural organizations receiving state support. For example, even though TCA currently administers only about two-thirds of the

“Between 2001 and 2010, total legislative appropriations to state arts agencies declined 39 percent, from $450.6 million to $276 million.

Direct expenditures on thearts by local governmentshave declined by almost20 percent in the pastthree years, down $169.5million – from $858 million in 2008 to $688 million

in 2010.”

NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIVE PHILANTHROPY

How does Texas compare?As the data show, state arts agencies across the nation haveexperienced volatile shifts in the resources budgeted to themfrom year to year. However, the dominant trend concerning fundingfor state arts agencies involves a general and sustained diminishmentof arts agency budgets (with a few rare exceptions found in states likeWyoming, Minnesota,and Hawaii).

Just as is the case inTexas, state budgetsappear to be graduallyrebounding from theimpact of two recessionsin a single decade andthe drastic spendingcuts that accompaniedthem —particularly overthe past four years.While the data seem togive reason for at leastcautious optimism, it isimportant to note thatreductions in stateappropriations to thearts continue to persistand have declined 15percent nationally, nearly$50 million, in the pastfive years alone. In 2013, Texas ranked 48th among U.S. statesin per capita state arts agency appropriations, spending only11 cents per person on the arts.

grant funds that it did five years ago, the median amount of money theagency grants to cultural organizations has risen by 50 percent from fiscalyears 2010-2014.

One last finding of interest revealed in the data concerns the progressHouston has made in increasing its share of resources distributed byTCA. Prior to the state’s fiscal crisis, there existed significant disparitiesamong Texas’ major metropolitan areas in the amount of TCA grantmoney directed to each region after adjusting for population. In fiscalyear 2010, Dallas received 9 percent more TCA grant money percapita than Houston, and San Antonio secured 17 percent more dollarsper capita from TCA than Houston. One consequence of the 2011budget cuts and the subsequent partial restoration of funding duringthe 2013 Legislative Session has been the narrowing of this regionalgap. As of now, TCA’s grant funding per person is virtually the samein Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston, as well as the state as a whole.x

State Arts Appropriations Per Capita

TCA Grant Money AwardedPer 1,000 Residents

[ ]

$

SOURCE: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE ARTS AGENCIES

SOURCE: TEXAS COMMISSION ON THE ARTS


INDICATOR Sources of Revenue

and SupportWith nonprofit status largely the norm among arts groupsregardless of their discipline, cultural organizations depend on publicand philanthropic support to fund their operations. While many artsnonprofits generate revenue from investments, rents, membershipdues, and other sources, program revenue and contributions comprisethe two main financing streams for arts nonprofits as a whole.

Program revenues can include admission, subscription, and other feespaid by arts consumers. While the data do not indicate what residentspay, or who is supplying this revenue, program revenues are primarilypaid by individuals who consume program services and are thus morelikely to reside within the region. Although this may be a suitable indicatorfor Houston, other regions with very high levels of tourism such as NewYork and Los Angeles may receive a greater percentage of programrevenues from outside the region. Accordingly, program revenue servesas a good proxy for the Houston region in terms of how the organizations ineach community are able to draw in resources from their region in exchange for presenting arts programs and services.

Contributions come primarily from individuals, with major components also coming from foundations, corporations, and bequests. Private funds are typically a much larger source of revenue in culturalorganizations than public funds, representing about a third of the totalincome stream of nonprofit groups nationwide. Such is the case forHouston especially, as the region’s nonprofits have historically benefittedfrom the generosity of private philanthropy, yet secured relatively littlepublic financial support. The Giving USA Foundation estimated thatthe total amount of private dollars going to arts and culture nationallywas $13.328 billion in 2010.xi

Compared to program revenue, contributions are more likelyto encompass funding sources from outside the region.Whilelocal residents, foundations, and businesses may account for the lion’sshare of the region’s total contributed revenue, arts nonprofits may also

receive significant contributed revenue fromsources such as national foundations. As an indicator, contributions illustrate the capacityof local organizations to raise revenue fromsupporters.

How are we doing?The region’s arts nonprofits have managed to successfully increasetheir revenues over the pastdecade. The total annual revenue forarts nonprofits aggregated across the

How do we compare?Increases in contributions are responsible for the bulk of Houston’sgains in total revenue: this financing stream improved 80 percent overthe past decade, as contributed revenue rose from $177 million to $319million. Whereas contributed revenue accounted for just 41 percent oftotal revenue in 2000, it provided nearly 55 percent of the funding forarts nonprofits in the region as of 2010.

Conversely, program revenue has seen its share of the total incomefor arts nonprofits decline over the past decade. Even though this financing stream improved 36 percent from 2000 to 2010, the proportion of total revenue deriving from program revenue remainedrelatively constant, changing from 37.3 to 37.0 percent. According tothe Texas Commission on the Arts, public funding for cultural purposesin Texas remains the lowest in the nation. With increases in gas prices,cost of food, and other consumergoods, less money is being spent onthe arts by the general public.xii Thus,while the region benefits from $53.68per resident in contributed revenue,the per capita measure for programrevenue is only at $36.45 per resident.

The Houston region’s 2010 revenuecomposition, however, correspondsclosely with the average breakdownamong the 13 other comparison regions of 53.6 percent contributedrevenue and 38.5 percent program revenue. Nonetheless, the incrediblegrowth in contributed revenue dwarfs the rise of program revenue. Asseen in the accompanying chart, 71.4 percent of the increase in totalrevenue over the past decade can be attributed to increases in contributed revenue. Only one metroarea in the comparison set – Dallas –exceeds Houston’s dependence onprivate giving to develop its arts sector.

Overall, the data suggest that Houston’sarts nonprofits have effectively capitalized on the generosity of theregion’s private philanthropy, as wellas national sources of private givingover the past decade. Yet, there remain opportunities for progress insimilarly boosting program revenuesand broadening audiences.

National Breakdown of PrivatePhilanthropy in 2010

(billions)

Sources of Support for Houston

Cultural Nonprofits

Amount of 2000-2010 Increases in Total Revenue

Accounted for by:

Revenue Breakdown for Cultural Organizations (2010)

[ ] region began in 2000 at $429 million, peaked at $732 million in 2006,and stood at $586 million as of 2010. Altogether, the data show a 36.8percent rise in total revenue for the Houston metro’s arts nonprofits.

There remainopportunities for progress in boosting program

revenues andbroadening audiences.

SOURCE: NCCS

SOURCE: NCCS

SOURCE: NCCS

SOURCE: GIVING USA FOUNDATION


INDICATOR Distribution of

Resources Among Cultural OrganizationsThe health and dynamism of a creative community dependson the presence of a diverse ecology of organizations that canfill a variety of cultural niches. The most vibrant regions boast a wide variety of arts and cultural organizations, differing in size, age, and mission, as well as the audiences they serve. Looking at thedistribution of financial resources across arts and cultural organizationswithin a region may thus indicate the breadth of a region’s culturalscene and offer insight into where gaps may exist that require attention.

As such, the data presented in this section illuminate how increases in financial resources (program revenues and contributions) and expenditures for arts and culture organizations have been distributedfrom 2000 to 2010. We calculated these figures by first determiningthe absolute dollar amount of the change in program revenues, contributions, and expenditures among cultural organizations in eachof our comparative regions. These additional funds were then sortedinto percentile ranges to determine how these resources have been divided among organizations. The analysis here breaks the increasesdown according to the 95th percentile (top 5%), 75th to 95th percentile(the next 20%), and the remainder (the bottom 75%). For our analysiswe defined the “middle range” of cultural organizations as those fallingbetween the 75th and 95th percentiles across the financial measures.

How do we compare?Although Houston’s cultural nonprofits experienced substantial growthin program revenues, contributions, and expenditures from 2000-2010, the data presented here demonstrate how those increases havebeen concentrated in the hands of only a few organizations. Nearly 88 percent of the increased revenue from contributions went to just 27 organizations in the Houston region (5 percent of the total 532 culturalorganizations in 2010). The only other region considered with a higherlevel of concentration in this measure is Dallas.

For program revenue, the disparity in each region was less severe, with5 percent of the region’s cultural organizations accounting for about76 percent of the increase – a distribution that more closely resemblesthat of Houston’s competitors. Yet the top 5 percent ultimately held an82 percent share of the increase in expenditures from 2000 to 2010.

The handful of large organizations in the region seems to be doing welland growing rapidly. But Houston’s mid-range organizations receive asmaller piece of the financial pie than their counterparts in other

Breakdown of 2000-2010 Increases in Program Revenue

Breakdown of 2000-2010 Increase in Contributions

Breakdown for 2000-2010 Increase in Expenditures

regions. Thus, the data suggest that Houston’s cultural community is primarily divided between a large number of small, often struggling,outfits and a relatively small number of large organizations, with onlya few mid-size nonprofits.

[ ]

The handfulof large

organizationsin the regionseems to bedoing welland growing

rapidly.

SOURCE: NCCS

SOURCE: NCCS

SOURCE: NCCS

Houston’smid-range

organizationsreceive a

smaller pieceof the

financial piethan their regional

counterparts.


“A high incidence of working artists in a particular place is a strong indicator ofcultural vitality and provides at least somemeasure of the support available for key

types of artistic endeavors.”–The Urban Institute, “Cultural Vitality in Communities: Interpretation and Indicators”xiii

Artists are the wellspring of a local arts scene and the essentialpillar of our creative community. To practice their craft, artists require a variety of forms of support that often includes access to education, a means to publicize their work, and most of all, an adequate income.

A 2012 study conducted by the Houston Arts Alliance and the Universityof Houston found that every county but one in the Houston region witnessed an increase in creative-sector employment between 2001and 2011. The greatest gain occurred in Harris County, which addeda total of 3,908 jobs. As more artists come to be employed and reside in Houston, it is pertinent to examine their current living andworking situations, including their occupations, earnings, and othercharacteristics that affect their livelihoods.

It can be difficult to gather data on artists, since their work often takesplace outside the usual structure of traditional employment. The Bureauof Labor Statistics, however, conducts a quarterly Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) Survey to gather employment and wagedata for artists who are not exclusively self-employed.xiv This surveyrecords information on wage rates and employment totals across 801detailed occupations nationwide. It is important to note, however, thatwhile OES counts both part-time and full-time employees, it does notcount self-employed workers. As a result, the employment totals included in this report are sourced from the 2006-2010 U.S. Census Equal Employment Opportunity Tabulations, which capture all three groups.

Artist Occupations as a Percentage of

All Artists (Houston MSA), 2006-2010

Producers and Directors

5%

Writers and Authors

6% PerformingArtists17%

Architects11%

Fine Artists8%

Designers46%

Photographers7%


INDICATOR Regional

Employment of ArtistsThe vibrancy of our region’s arts community stems from theartists who produce cultural programming and content.With its diverse population, a talented and productive workforce, a reasonable cost of living, and good quality of life, Houston has thepotential to become a desirable destination for artists seeking a basefor personal and artistic growth.

Measuring the conditions of artists’ employment yields valuableinsights into the breadth and scope of our region’s arts community.Additionally, this indicator may be used to indirectly gauge the diversityof artistic pursuits occurring in the region. It seems reasonable to assume that the greater the number of artists within a community, thegreater the chances of a diversity of artistic disciplines, resulting in aricher, more varied culture.

How do we compare?Considering the financial indicators presented in “Funding forthe Arts”, Houston’s arts nonprofits have demonstrated progress in improving their financial wherewithal. The region, however, sustains asurprisingly low level of arts employment; the data suggest that this isnot a region that is particularly supportive of artists. Compared to theother 13 metros selected for comparison, Houston outperforms onlySan Antonio and ranks second to last in terms of the share of arts jobsrelative to total employment, with only 10.93 out of every 1,000 jobshoused in the arts sector.

Put differently, there are 2,081,735 artists in the United States (identified by the occupation to which they devoted the most hours ina given week) according to the U.S.Census Bureau. Together, theycomprise 1.4 percent of the nation’stotal workforce. In Houston, arts careers make up 1.1 percent of the region’s total employment, trailingboth the national average and thecomparison regions’ average of 1.7 percent.

The Houston region scoresbelowthe national averageon the level ofrepresentation for workers in almostevery category of arts profession. Thedata display how Houston faresagainst the competitor regions’ aver-age share of employment for arts profession categories. The share ofthe region’s employment encompassed by arts professionslags behind competitors with the sole exception being“Dancers and choreographers.”

Artist Occupations Per 1,000 Jobs in Region

(2006-2010)

Arts Occupations’ Share of Regional Employment:Houston vs. Competitor

Regions

[ ]

The greater the number of artists,the greater the chances for a richer, more varied culture.

SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, EEO TABLES


SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR, OES SURVEY


INDICATOR Artist Earnings

According to a study by the Urban Institute, artists in the United States are often underpaid in relation to theireducation, skills, and societal contributions.xv In the case ofHouston, a high degree of wage disparity persists among artists, bothin terms of geographic location and the different disciplines that makeup a given artist occupation. Meager earnings are one of the chief reasons why increased funding remains such an enduring need for artists.

Examining the earning levels for individuals whose primary source ofincome comes from arts-related occupations shows how viable it is for a person to pursue a career in the arts in the Houston region. As an indicator, income levels for artists can lend insight into how hospitable our region is for working artists, as well as better informfunding decisions.

Data for this indicator is sourced from the U.S. Bureau of Labor’s Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) Survey, as well as the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2006-2010 EqualEmployment Opportunity (EEO) tabulation. The OES producesemployment and wage estimates for more than 800 occupations, and documents the wages paid to non-self-employed persons. The occupations used in this indicator are identical to the NEA’s list of occupations it considers to be “artist” occupations.

How are we doing? From 2005 to 2012, the Houston region witnessed a modestgrowth in arts sector wages. From 2005 to 2012, arts workers’pay climbed by 19 percent – roughly equivalent to the rate of inflation over the same period as calculated by the Consumer Price Index. While there appears to be opportunity for improvement in the area of remuneration in the arts, the overall narrative illustrated by the data appears relatively neutral, ifnot positive.

How do we compare?Low wages often signify a lack of sufficient opportunity for workerswith a certain skill set. When comparing how much money arts workersin Houston take home against their counterparts in competitor regions,the numbers initially seem to indicate that Houston is failing to keepup with its peers. In fact, Houston ranks last for mean hourly wages inarts occupations among the 13 other regions considered.

Houston is distinguished, however, by the low cost of living its residentsenjoy relative to other major U.S. cities – something that the artscommunity has benefitted from as well. The chart here illustrates boththe nominal mean hourly earnings for those employed in the selectedarts occupations, as well as the value of those wages when adjusted to Houston’s cost of living. For example, the average pay for arts occupations in Los Angeles was 122 percent greater than Houston in2012. Due to the discrepancy in thecost of living between Los Angelesand Houston, however, a $28.69per hour wage in Houston affordsthe same standard of living that a$47.89 per hour wage does in LosAngeles. After adjusting the wagedata for cost of living, Houston soarsfrom 13th to 2nd place, ranking behind only Los Angeles.

Moreover, members of Houston’s workforce employed in arts occupations earn slightly higher wages on average than the $17 perhour mean hourly wage for the region as a whole. These wages oftencompare unfavorably to what much of Houston’s technical andprofessional skilled workforce earns. Nonetheless, the compensationthat an average Houston arts worker receives still exceeds the $16 perhour threshold regarding what is considered to be a “living wage” fora family of four.xvi Arts occupation wages are by no means generous,but the data indeed suggest that our region generally offers individualsemployed in arts occupations adequate financial means to supportthemselves and their families.

Average Wages for Arts Occupations by Region (2012)

Earnings for Arts Occupations

in Houston Region by Mean Hourly Wage

[ ]After

adjusting for cost of living,

Houston rankssecond inartist wagesbehind onlyLos Angeles.

SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR, OES SURVEY

SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR, OES SURVEY XVII


INDICATOR Characteristics of Region’s Artists

Among the many factors that contribute to a robust arts scenein Houston, the diversity of the region’s population serves asa vital opportunity for engagement among artists from a vastarray of backgrounds and experiences.When compared to the10 largest metropolitan areas, Houston prevails as the most diverse,narrowly surpassing the New York metropolitan area. According to areport by the Kinder Institute for Urban Research, from the years1990 to 2010, the balance among the four major ethnic groupsgreatly increased, rendering every group a demographic minority.The Kinder Institute has also surveyed Houston’s population and foundthat rates of attendance at cultural performance events do not vary byethnicity in the region (after controlling for socioeconomic status).xviii

As of 2010, Houston’s Anglo population stands at 39.7 percent, Non-White Hispanic at 35.3 percent, Black at 16.8 percent, Asian at 6.5percent, and multiracial at 1.3 percent.xix The cultural vitality of theHouston region thus rests on its ability to understand and appreciatethe community of artists who make Houston their home, meanwhileharnessing this opportunity to cultivate a largely unique arts scene.

How do we compare?When compared to the 13 competitors, the region’s artistsemerge as the third most ethnically diverse population.Moreover, Houston’s artists reflect the region’s multi-ethnic, polyglotidentity. Unlike many other areas with large minority populations,Houston is unique in that it does not contain a single dominant ethnicgroup. In both the region’s general as well as artist populations, Anglos,Blacks, Asians, and Latino all are represented.

Still, in contrast to Houston’s overall diversity, more than half of artistsare Anglo. As asserted by the Urban Institute, within the next few yearslays the possibility of the Latino population becoming the Houston region’s largest ethnic group. Such an increase in the Latino populationcould in turn result in an increase in the number of Latino artists employed in the region.

Of the 2.1 million artists residing in the United States, merely 20 percent are from ethnic minority groups. Artists are thus less likely thanother workers to be of a minority ethnicity, though the pattern variesgreatly by occupation. For example, while only 13 percent of writersand authors are non-white, 41 percent of all dancers or choreographersare non-white and/or Hispanic.xx One possible explanation could bethe lack of opportunities for recruitment and encouragement amongcertain populations to pursue a career in the arts. However, the National Endowment for the Arts has taken the initiative in the majorityof major cities to develop museums devoted to African Americanartists.xxi Thus, an increase in support and encouragement within theHouston community has the potential to increase the participation ofevery ethnic group in the arts.

Arts Employment by Ethnicity (2006-2010)

[ ]

Houston’s artists reflect the region’s multi-ethnic, polyglot identity.

The cultural vitality of the

region rests on ourability to understand and appreciate Houston’s artists.



INDICATOR Higher Education

DegreesFor many artists, pursuing a degree in higher education provides a foundation upon which to build their careers andexposes them to an extensive network of fellow artists.According to a 2011 study by the National Endowment for the Arts,artists are on average more educated than the general workforce: inthe United States, 59 percent of all artists have at least a bachelor’sdegree, compared to the 32 percent of all workers who have a degree.Additionally, one out of every 10 college-educated workers has majoredin an arts-related field. However, the distribution of arts degrees variesgreatly based upon the given field. Whereas 89 percent of all architectshold a bachelor’s degree or higher level of education, only about 30percent of dancers and choreographers pursue a college education.xxii

One major dimension of cultural vitality in a given region is the support provided by its educational institutions. Thus, in order for theHouston region to truly foster a more attractive environment in whichartists can grow and thrive, it is vital to determine the availability of opportunities for furthering their education. In addition, examining the number of arts degrees awarded to students can indicate the success rate of students pursuing arts-related educations in Houston.

How are we doing?Over the course of seven years, the number of arts-relateddegrees awarded in Houston steadily increased, with baccalaureate emerging as by far the most popular program:as of 2012, there were more baccalaureate degrees being awardedthan all of the other degrees combined. Whereas the popularity of associate degrees has remained constant, master’s degrees have morethan doubled since 2005, indicating an increased availability of opportunity and support for individuals pursuing arts-related degrees.According to the data, the number of doctorates in the arts remainsscarce, though from 2010 to 2012 there has been a slow yet steadyincrease in Ph.D.’s awarded. This is most likely due to the fact thatamong Houston regional institutions, the only Ph.D. programs currentlyoffered include Music, Music Performance (general), Conducting, andDance (general), plus Creative Writing, and Art History. In addition,the majority of institutions are particularly selective in terms of numberof artists they accept into their doctorate programs and have the obligation to place students in positions once they complete theirdegrees.

According to a 2013 statement re leased by the Col lege Art Association, master’s programs remain the terminal degrees for those majoring in the arts. However, demand for Ph.D. programs has increased of late, partly due to the fact that those seekingjobs in higher administrative positions require a doctorate.xxiii

Increasingly, artists now need a doctorate to teach at the collegelevel.xxiv This trend could in turn result in a considerable rise in the number of doctoral degrees awarded in the Houston region as well asacross the United States.

Arts-Related Degrees Awarded in Houston Region

[ ]

According to a 2011study by the NationalEndowment for the Arts,artists are on averagemore educated thanthe general workforce.

SOURCE: CENTER FOR HOUSTON’S FUTURE, 2014


Artistic and cultural concerns have figured prominently in Houston lifethroughout the region’s history. It is, infact, this integration of arts and cultureinto local growth that makes significantand meaningful research on thesubject so challenging. In studyingHouston and the surrounding area, thevelocity of growth exacerbates thechallenges. We typically track our explosive gains by charting jobs andtraffic, oil prices and office rents. Ameasurable set of arts indicators wouldbe a worthy addition to the mix.

This Arts & Cultural Heritage CommunityIndicator Report adds fuel to the discussion, but the opportunities forfurther study remain myriad. Questioningand exploring the role of arts in localeconomics is important, particularly the“old school” arts policy issue regardingthe appropriate response to the widelydifferential access to the arts that arisefrom an individual’s geographic locationand socio-economic circumstances.Houston is a petri dish for this very typeof analysis.

How important are arts and culture to regional economic developmentpolicy? This is not a topic directly addressed in this report, but it needsto become part of a meaningful dialogue alongside all the other important topics of concern.

There is much to be learned about howartists, as well as arts and cultural organizations in the city, affect the productivity and growth of other sectors. What art forms or types of employment matter the most, and inwhat neighboring sectors? How doesan arts education make a more productive engineer? How does a theater district influence patentingrates? These questions and many morewere well addressed in the BrookingsInstitution’s Creative Communities: ArtWorks in Economic Development. In the Foreword, former National Endowment for the Arts ChairmanRocco Landesman emphasized “theneed for long-term reliable data totrack the arts’ unique effect on economic development.”

The NEA and the Bureau of EconomicAnalysis are beginning a study of artsand cultural industry data, the samesort of data that we have used in thisreport on the Houston region. TheCenter’s research for this 2014 reporthas inspired provocative conversationswithin our team and with our peers inother parts of the country. We are allusing exactly the same types of dataand analysis, but as the reader can see,we can only ever capture the tip of theiceberg.

Throughout this year-long study period, the Center for Houston’s

Future brought together professionalsin the arts and in the community to discuss the issues and opportunities regarding arts and culture in the Houstonregion. Among the most rewarding aspects of these focus groups and peer review meetings were the creativeconversations that had not occurredpreviously. Just as arts and culture canstimulate STEM professionals, we canstimulate one another to engage inconstructive and creative actions,rooted in verifiable and reliable datasets. The Mayor of Houston, AnniseParker, has called for a cultural plan forthe city. This is an important step, andthe plan should be a stepping stone tocontinued dialogue within the greaterHouston region. A robust conversation,substantiated by meaningful data, is agood start.

This study is available in print and online, and will be accompanied bythe Center’s Summer Salon Series tokeep the flame alive. And here at theCenter for Houston’s Future, we’ll beinitiating more formal exploration ofthe topics for further study as outlinedin this report. There is plenty of workto be done. Our challenge is to carry the work forward for the bettermentof the Houston region and its residents,and to spotlight our arts and culturallife for the rest of the globe.

– Gwendolyn H. Goffe

The inability to transport visitors – as well as regionalinhabitants – to Houston’s tourist attractions and artsvenues significantly hampers the city from becoming anarts destination. Dissatisfaction with transportation wasechoed in the Greater Houston Convention and VisitorsBureau study, which found that Houston received “criticismfor safety and walkability” and that “most travelers view[the city’s] public transportation as not as competitive asother cities.” Transportation and safety concerns werealso featured as reasons Houstonians refused to attendarts events in the Kinder Institute for Urban Research report, “The Houston Arts Survey.” “Thirty-six percent [ofthose surveyed] pointed to traffic or other transportation problems that make it difficult to get to the places wherearts events are held and 32 percent cited safety concerns.”

Arts experts involved in the Center’s focus groups alsoexpressed dismay over the lack of infrastructural connectivityto Houston’s various arts venues and products, particularlywith regard to public art and accessibility between arts venues.

With regard to robust arts and culture scenes andcompetitiveness, it was felt among focus group participantsthat physical connectivity begets community connectivityas well as greater public appreciation and participationin Houston’s arts assets. In an exercise conducted duringthe focus groups, participants were asked to nominatecities that epitomize the concept of world-class arts andcultural heritage. The majority of cities selected, includingParis, New York City and London as the top three, arenoted for having public spaces that invite the communityto reflect and communicate about the arts they have recently experienced. The byproducts of improved connectivity, including public spaces and transportationinfrastructure, contribute to greater overall quality of life and can also foster a city as a global arts tourist destination.

Dramatic cutbacks on state education funding in 2011left many elementary and middle school children withoutclassroom art training. While STEM preparedness has received plenty of attention as a pressing issue forsecuring the competitiveness of the region, there hasbeen less recognition of the critical role of art in education(as opposed to simply learning about art) to foster creative thinking and innovation in any and all subjectareas, including science and technology.

“Artist-teachers, especially, havehelped mitigate the erosion of artseducation in public schools. But recentresearch shows that access to artseducation has declined dramaticallyover the past 30 years, particularly forlower-income and minority children, as public schools have become moresegregated and curricula have emphasized teaching to the test ratherthan cultivating children’s creativity, imagination and divergent thinking.”

– NATIONAL COMMITTEEFOR RESPONSIVE PHILANTHROPY

echoed in the Greater Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau study, which found thatHouston

“The arts are not an amenity or a sector that exists in isolation, but they are wholly integrated into local economics.” – MICHAEL RUSHTONxxv


i Maria-Rosario Jackson, Florence Kabwasa-Green, and Joaquin Herranz, “Cultural Vitality in Communities: Interpretation and Indicators,” The Urban Institute, 2006,http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/311392_Cultural_Vitality.pdf.

ii From 2000 to 2010, the number of culturalorganizations in San Antonio grew from 106to 186. For San Diego, the increase was from222 to 397 cultural organizations.iii Stephen L. Klineberg, Jie Wu, Celina L. Aldape, “Houston Arts Survey: Participation, Perceptions, and Prospects,” Kinder Institute forUrban Research, 2012, http://kinder.rice.edu/

uploadedFiles/Center_for_the_Study_of_ Houston/Kinder%20 Houston%20Arts%20Survey%202012.pdf.

iv “2013 National Arts Index,” Americans for the Arts, http://www.artsindexusa.org/national-arts-index.

v “Houston Facts and Figures,” The City of Houston, 2014, http://www.houstontx.gov/abouthouston/houstonfacts.html.vi Ryan Stubbs, “Public Funding for the Arts: 2013 Update,” Grantmakers in the Arts: Supporting a Creative America, 2013, http://www.giarts.org/article/public-funding-arts-2013-update.

vii Ibid. viii Houston Arts Alliance, University of Houston, Greater Houston Partnership, & EMSI, “The Creative Economy of Houston” 2012). Retrieved from http://www.giarts.org/sites/default/files/The-Creative-Economy-of-Houston.pdf.Note: This study relied upon a different definition of the arts than the definition set forth in this report. In addition, the HAA study addresses a ten-county region, not the nine-county region covered in this report.

ix The data used to assemble the state arts funding indicators comes from the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies (NASAA) as well as the Texas Commission on the Arts. NASAA collects data from all 50 states plus the District of Columbia. NASAA provided data for funding by states in fiscal years 2000-2013. Detailed information on grant applications accepted by TCA has been made available by the agency for fiscal years 2010-2014.

x Texas Commission on the Arts, accessed 2014, http://www.arts.texas.gov.xi Compared with $100.6 billion to religion, $41.7 billion to education, $26.5 billion to human services, $33 billion to foundations, $24.2 billion to public society benefit, and $22.8 billion to health.

xii Texas Commission on the Arts, “Texas Commission on the Arts Strategic Plan: For the Fiscal Years 2013-17 Period,” 2012, http://www.arts.texas.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/TCA-Strategic-Plan-2013-17.pdf.

xiii Maria-Rosario Jackson, Florence Kabwasa-Green, and Joaquin Herranz, “Cultural Vitality in Communities: Interpretation and Indicators,” The Urban Institute, 2006.

xiv Employment and wage data are sourced from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The measures incorporate county-leveldata, and selected occupations according to Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) System codes. The occupationsand their attendant SOC codes selected to measure “Arts Occupations” as a whole include: Art Directors (27-1011), Craft Artists (27-1012), Fine Artists, Including Painters, Sculptors, and Illustrators (27-1013), Multimedia Artists and Animators (27-1014), Fashion Designers (27-1022), Graphic Designers (27-1024), Set and Exhibit Designers (27-1027), Designers, All Other (27-1029), Producers and Directors (27-2012), Dancers (27-2031), Music Directors and Composers(27-2041), Musicians and Singers (27-2042), Writers and Authors (27-3043), Photographers (27-4021), Camera

Operators, Television, Video, and Motion Picture (27-4031), Film and Video Editors (27-4032), Actors (27-2011), Artists and Related Workers, All Other (27-1019).

xv Maria-Rosario Jackson, Florence Kabwasa-Green, Joaquin Herranz, Jr., Kadija Ferryman, Caron Atlas, Eric Wallner, Carole Rosenstein, “Investing in Creativity: A Study of the Support Structure for U.S. Artists,” Culture, Creativity & Communities Program at Urban Institute, 2003, http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/411311_ investing_in_creativity.pdf.

xvi Center for Public Policy Priorities, “Family Budget Calculator,” 2014, http://familybudgets.org/.xvii 2013 Salary.com Cost of Living Wizard.xviii Stephen L. Klineberg, Jie Wu, Celina L. Aldape, “Houston Arts Survey: Participation, Perceptions, and Prospects,” Kinder Institute for Urban Research, 2012.

xix Kinder Institute for Urban Research & the Hobby Center for the Study of Texas, “Houston Region Grows More Racially/Ethnically Diverse, With Small Declines in Segregation,” 2010, http://kinder.rice.edu/uploadedFiles/Urban_Research_Center/Media/Houston%20Region%20Grows%20More%20Ethnically%20Diverse%202-13.pdf

xx National Endowment for the Arts, “Artists and Art Workers in the United States: Findings from the American CommunitySurvey (2005-2009) and the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (2010),” Art Works, 2011, http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/105.pdf.

xxi Gloria Jean Watkins (Bell Hooks), “Race and Ethnicity,” Boundless, accessed 2014, https://www.boundless.com/art-history/global-art-since-1950/postmodernism/race-and-ethnicity/.

xxii National Endowment for the Arts, “Artists and Art Workers in the United States: Findings from the American CommunitySurvey (2005-2009) and the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (2010),” Art Works, 2011.

xxiii Linda Downs and Ellen K. Levy, “Field Report: Notes on the Panel ‘The Reluctant Doctorate: PhD Programs for Artists?” College Art Association, 2011, http://www.collegeart.org/features/reluctantdoctorate.

xxiv Daniel Grant, “For Artists, M.F.A. or Ph.D?”, Inside Higher Ed, 2013, http://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2013/05/24/phd-challenges-mfa-requisite-degree-arts-professors-essay

xv Michael Rushton (editor), Creative Communities: Art Works in Economic Development (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2013).

[APPENDIX & REFERENCES]

The photographs in this report illustrate just a hint of the vitality and diversity of the arts and cultural heritage in our region and are provided, with our thanks, by the following:� Inside Front Cover: e Woodlands Conventions & Visitors Bureau (CVB); Orange Show/Houston Art Car Parade, CHF photo by Laura McLoone; HoustonGrand Opera, photo by Lynn Lane; Alley eatre � Page 1: Houston Center for Contemporary Craft (HCCC), photo by Harrison Evans; Galveston Island CVB;Da Camera; Multicultural Education and Counseling rough the Arts (MECA), photo by Pin Lim � Page 3: Galveston Island CVB; Patrick Henry MiddleSchool Mariachi Band, CHF photo by Laura McCloone; Alley eatre, photo by T. Charles Erickson; MECA, photo by Pin Lim; Da Camera � Page 5: WALIPP-TSU Preparatory Academy Middle School Choir, photo by Jeff Fitlow � Page 6: Greater Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau (GHCVB) � Page 8: Museumof Fine Arts, Houston � Page 10 & 11: Orange Show/Beer Can House, photo by David A. Brown; Orange Show, photo by David A. Brown; MECA, photo by Pin Lim; HCCC, Photo by Cathy Carver; Alley eatre, photo by Jann Whaley; MECA, photo by Pin Lim � Page 13: Da Camera � Page 15: Alley eatre; Orange Show/Beer Can House, photo by David A. Brown � Page 19: e Woodlands CVB; MECA, photo by Pin Lim; � Page 23: MECA, photo by Pin Lim� Page 30 Patrick Henry Middle School Mariachi Band, CHF photo by Laura McLoone � Page 31: Houston Grand Opera, photo by Lynn Lane; � Page 33:HCCC, photos by Kim Coffman � Page 34: Orange Show/Smither Park, photo by Wendy Schroell; Orange Show � Page 36: Houston Grand Opera, photo byLynn Lane; HCCC, photo by Kim Coffman � Page 37: HCCC, photo by Kim Coffman � Page 38: Alley eatre; MECA, photo by Pin Lim; Houston Ballet, CHF photoby Kristy VanZandt; MECA, photo by Pin Lim; Orange Show, photo by David A. Brown � Page 40: Houston Grand Opera, photo by Lynn Lane; HCCC, photo by KimCoffman; Houston Ballet, CHF photo by Laura McLoone � Page 42: Menil Collection � Page 48: Houston Grand Opera, photo by Lynn Lane; HCCC, photo byCaitie Sellers; HCC, photo by Kim Coffman � Inside Back Cover: Galveston Island CVB; e Woodlands CVB; HCCC, photo by Kim Coffman


Abbing, H. (2002).Why Are Artists Poor?: The Exceptional Economy of the Arts.Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Americans for the Arts. (2012). Arts & Economic Prosperity IV. Retrieved fromhttp://www.americansforthearts.org/by-program/reports-and-data/research-studies-publications/arts-economic-prosperity-iv.

Americans for the Arts. (2013). The BCA National Survey of Business Supportfor the Arts. Retrieved from http://www.partnershipmovement.org/upload/web-files/BCA_Survey_V6_Single.pdf.

Americans for the Arts, Kushner, R. J., & Cohen, R.(2012). National Arts Index: An Annual Measurement of theVitality of Arts and Culture in the United States.

Americans for the Arts, & Sundance Preserve. (2008).The Arts and Civic Engagement: Strengthening the 21st Century Community. Retrieved from http://www.americansfort-hearts.org/sites/default/files/pdf/information_services/ research/policy_roundtable/2008_NAPR_full_report.PDF.

Badham, M. (2010). The Menace of Measurement: A discussionabout arts indicators. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/attach-

ments /8506428/download_ file?st=MTM5NDc1NDIzNCw5OC4yM-DAuMTIxLjg0&ct=MTM5NDc1NDIzNg%3D%3D.

Cultural Data Project, Slover Linett Audience Research, Lee, S., & Linett,P. (2013). New Data Directions for the Cultural Landscape: Toward a Better-Informed,

Stronger Sector. Retrieved from http://www.culturaldata.org/wp-content/uploads/new-data-directions-for-the-cultural-landscape-a-report-by-slover-linett-audience-research-for-the-cultural-data-project_final.pdf.

Dean Runyan Associates. (2013). The Economic Impact of Travel on Texas, 1990-2012p. Retrieved fromhttp://www.travel.state.tx.us/getattachment/f276e08b-2dd2-4960-b27b-c13d64603056/TXImp12pRev.aspx.

Duxbury, N. (2003). Cultural Indicators and Benchmarks in Community Indicator Projects: Performance Measures for Cultural Investment? In Accounting for Culture: Examining the Building Blocks of Cultural Citizenship (pp. 34–35). Gatineau.

Grams, D. (1996). Territorial Markers: A Case Study of the Public Art of Bronzeville, 225–240.

Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance. (2009). Research into Action: Pathways to New Opportunities. Retrieved fromhttp://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/audience-development-for-the-arts/audience-surveys/Documents/Pathways-to-New-Opportunities.pdf.

Guetzkow, J. (2002). How the Arts Impact Communities: An introduction to the literature on arts impact studies. Retrieved from http://www.princeton.edu/~artspol/workpap/WP20 - Guetzkow.pdf.

Houston Arts Alliance, University of Houston, Greater Houston Partnership, & EMSI. (2012). The Creative Economy of Houston. Retrieved fromhttp://www.giarts.org/sites/default/files/The-Creative-Economy-of-Houston.pdf.

Jackson, M.-R., Kabwasa-Green, F., Herranz, J., & The Urban Institute. (2006). Cultural Vitality in Communities: Interpretation and Indicators. Retrievedfrom http://www.urban.org/publications/311392.html.

Jackson, M.-R. (2004). Investing in Creativity: A Study of the Support Structure for U.S. Artists. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 34(1), 43–58. doi:10.3200/JAML.34.1.43-58.

Jackson, M.-R., Herranz Jr., J., & Kabwasa-Green, F., (2003). Art and Culture in Communities. Retrieved fromhttp://www.urban.org/center/cnp/Projects/artsculture.cfm. Jenkins, H., & Bertozzi, V. (2007). Artistic Expression in the Age of Participatory Culture: How and WhyYoung People Create. Retrieved from http://www.artsjournal.com/league/bertozzi.pdf.

Klineberg, S. L., Wu, J., & Aldape, C. L. (2012). The Houston Arts Survey: Participation, Perceptions, and Prospects. Retrieved from http://kinder.rice.edu/uploadedFiles/Center_for_the_Study_of_Houston/Kinder Houston Arts Survey 2012.pdf.

Markusen, A., Anne, G., Design, M. I. on C., & Arts, N. E. for the. (n.d.). Creative Placemaking. Retrieved from http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/CreativePlacemaking-Paper.pdf.

National Endowment for the Arts. (2011). Arts education in America: What the declines mean for arts participation. Retrieved from http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/2008-SPPA-ArtsLearning.pdf.National Endowment for the Arts. (2008). 2008 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts. Retrieved from http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/2008-SPPA.pdf.

National Endowment for the Arts. (2011). Artist Employment Projections through 2018 (pp. 1–14). Retrieved from http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/103.pdf.

National Endowment for the Arts. (2011). Artists and Arts Workers in the United States (pp. 1–46). Retrieved from http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/105.pdf.

National Endowment for the Arts. (2011). Time and Money: Using Federal Data to Measure the Value of Performing Arts Activities (pp. 1–32).

National Endowment for the Arts. (2011). The Arts and Human Development: Framing a National Research Agenda for the Arts, Lifelong Learning, and Individual Well-Being. Retrieved from http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/TheArtsAndHumanDev.pdf.

National Endowment for the Arts. (2012). An Average Day in the Arts: State Participation Patterns from the American Time Use Survey for 2006-2010(pp. 1–41). Retrieved from http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/106.pdf.

National Endowment for the Arts. (2012).How the United States Funds the Arts. Retrieved from http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/how-the-us-funds-the-arts.pdf.

Novak-Leonard, J. L., & Brown, Wolfbrown, A. S. (2011). Beyond attendance: A multi-modal understanding of arts participation. Retrieved fromhttp://arts.gov/sites/default/files/2008-SPPA-BeyondAttendance.pdf.

Rosenstein, C. (2009). Cultural Development and City Neighborhoods. Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy: Charting Civil Society, (21).

Shewfelt, S. (2012).Our Town Community Indicators Study. National Endowment for the Arts. Retrieved from http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/OT-Indicators-PowerPoint.pdf.

Smith, M., Wolff, J., Arnold, F., & Moyar, T. (n.d.). Public Art as Economic Investment: A Case-Study for Bronzeville. Retrieved fromhttp://gis.depaul.edu/shwang/CommunityOutreach/GEO242_Service_Learning_Project/GEO242_Win0809_BVIC_final_report.pdf.

Stern, M. J. (2011). Age and arts participation: A case against demographic destiny. Retrieved from http://arts.gov/sites/default/files/2008-SPPA-Age.pdf.

Stern, M. J., & Seifert, S. C. (2009). Civic Engagement and the Arts: Issues of Conceptualization and Measurement. Retrieved fromhttp://animatingdemocracy.org/sites/default/files/CE_Arts_SternSeifert.pdf.

Stern, M. J., & Seifert, S. C. (2012). Cultural Asset Mapping Project (Progress Report). Retrieved fromhttp://www.sp2.upenn.edu/siap/docs/creative_assets_mapping/CulturalAssetMappingProjectProgressReport.pdf.

Stockton Rush Bartol Foundation. (2001). Culture Builds Community: The Power of Arts and Culture in Community Building. Retrieved fromhttp://www.sp2.upenn.edu/siap/docs/culture_builds_community/research_brief.pdf.

Texas Cultural Trust, & Create Texas. (2008). 20 Reasons The Texas Economy Depends on The Arts and the Creative Sector. Retrieved from http://txculturaltrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/20-reasonsrevised.pdf.

Texas Cultural Trust, TXP, Texas Commision on the Arts, & Recovery.gov. (2010). The Art of Economic Development. Retrieved from http://txculturaltrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/FINAL_ArtEcoDevReport.pdf.

The Urban Institute. (1999). Community Partnerships for Cultural Participation: Concepts, Prospects, and Challenges (Early Findings Report).Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/409020.pdf.

TNS. (2013). Houston Visitor Profile Calendar Year 2012. Retrieved from http://www.visithoustontexas.com/media/research/.

TXP, Texas Cultural Trust, Recovery.gov, & Texas Commision on the Arts. (2011). Update: Impact of Arts & Culture Industries on Texas. Retrieved from http://txculturaltrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Update_Final_021711.pdf.

UNESCO. (2010). Towards a UNESCO Suite of indicators on Culture and Development (2009-2010): Literature Review.

Walker, C., Scott-Melnyk, S., & Sherwood, K. (2002). Reggae to Rachmaninoff: How and Why People Participate in Arts and Culture.Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/310595_ReggaetoRach.pdf.

Walker, C., & Sherwood, K. (2003). Participation in Arts and Culture: The Importance of Community Venues. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/310795_venues.pdf.

[BIBLIOGRAPHY& FURTHERREADING]

DonorsDorothy and Mickey AblesAdame & AssociatesStanford and Joan Alexander FoundationAlkek and Williams FoundationAllegiance Bank TexasAllen Boone Humphries Robinson LLPAmegy BankAndrews Kurth, LLPJohn Arnoldy/Triten CorporationAT&TDenise and Philip BahrBank of AmericaBank of Texas, N.A.E. William BarnettAdele and Lan BentsenPeter Bishop, Ph.D.Leslie and Jack Blanton, Jr.Lori and Michael BloomfieldBlue LanceMinnette BoeselBoyarMillerBPBracewell & Giuliani, LLPSteve BriceBrookfield PropertiesThe Brown FoundationBud Light/Silver Eagle DistributorsBYN, Inc. and SBTN Houston, Inc.Jenny and James CalawayCalvert Davis Insurance AgencyCapgemini ConsultingCatholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston

CenterPoint EnergyCentral Houston, Inc.ChevronChinese Community Center HoustonCitizens for Affordable EnergyCity of HoustonCity of RosenbergCity of Sugar LandComerica BankKaren and Gus Comiskey, Jr.Community Health Choice, Inc.Conway MacKenzie, Inc.Molly and Jim CrownoverCullen FoundationBruce CulpepperDannenbaum Engineering CorporationDataCertWilliam DeLaneyDeloitte LLPDeVry UniversityIrma Diaz-Gonzalez and Roberto GonzalezSusanna DokupilDow Chemical CompanyEagle Global Advisors, LLCElectronic Power Design, Inc.Jenny and Jim Elkins Family FundC. Richard EverettExxon Mobil CorporationFederal Reserve Bank - Houston BranchAnn and Peter J. Fluor

Fort Bend Independent School DistrictHarriet and Joe FosterCarmela and Kelly FrelsFrost National BankGenslerGLM Energy, Inc.Gwendolyn GoffeMelanie Gray and Mark WawroGreater Houston Convention & Visitors BureauGreater Houston PartnershipGreenberg Traurig, LLPGrijalva & Allen, P.C.Merrill and Joseph HafnerHarry Gee, Jr. and AssociatesHaynes and Boone, LLPH-E-BHouston Airport SystemsHouston Endowment, Inc.Houston Independent School DistrictHouston MethodistHouston Municipal Employees Pension SystemHouston Public MediaPam and Bo HowardHowell Family Foundation Huffington FoundationLinda and Barry HunsakerIBC BankIntegrated Geophysics CorporationGuy Robert JacksonTraci and Ken JandaRick JaramilloJPMorgan Chase FoundationJunior League of HoustonAnn and Stephen KaufmanKBRKeller Williams Houston MetropolitanKempner Capital Management, Inc.Kathryn and James KetelsenKHOU - Channel 11William S. and Lora Jean Kilroy FoundationKinder FoundationKipling Jones & Co.Shannon LangrandLee CollegeLocke Lord LLPLone Star College SystemKaren LoveLumina FoundationMadison Charitable FoundationMadison ResourcesMarathon Oil CompanyMarek CompaniesMD Anderson Cancer CenterMD Anderson FoundationMemorial Hermann Health SystemAnne and John MendelsohnTrini Mendenhall-SosaMillennial EnergySteven and Sheila Miller Foundation Ginni and Richard MithoffRenee MorrisCatherine Clark MosbacherNCI Building Systems, Inc.

Norton Rose FulbrightBeverly and Staman OgilvieTravis OglesbyKenneth OlanPalmetto Partners, Ltd.Parallon Supply Chain SolutionsSuzanne and Bob PotterWilliam PyleQuinn Reed AssociatesRaise Your Hand TexasRed & Black BooksReliant, an NRG CompanyRice UniversitySherry Robinson and George FinkAnn and J. Hugh RoffRegina RogersSan Jacinto College DistrictBetsy and Ed SchreiberSearch Homeless ServicesMarie and Mick SeidlCathryn and Douglas Selman Shadywood FoundationTerry ShaikhJeri and Marc ShapiroShell Oil CompanySmith, Graham & Co. Investment Advisors, LPSpectra EnergySt. Agnes AcademyLois and George StarkStatesman Business AdvisorsY. Ping Sun and David LeebronSysco CorporationJudy and Charles TateTexas Children's HospitalThe Fay SchoolThe Fountain of PraiseThe Woman's Hospital of TexasThunder ExplorationTIRR Memorial HermannPhoebe and Bobby TudorTXU EnergyUniversity of HoustonUniversity of St. ThomasUrban Commercial MortgageUTHealthUTMB HealthSusan and Gene VaughanAmarilis Vega- Rodríguez, MD and Joel E. RodríguezVinson & Elkins, LLPWells FargoMary and Ralph WheelerBeth WilliamsHeidi Williams Nancy D. Williams and Norman L. Stevens, IIIBeth WolffThe Woodlands TownshipE.D. WulfeDr. George YangYMCA of Greater HoustonSusan B. and Austin YoungSusan C. YoungFY2013 Donors, list complete as of publication deadline

THANK YOU TO OUR


CENTER FOR HOUSTON’S FUTURE

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Rick Jaramillo Chairman

Eugene H. Vaughan Founding Chairman

Catherine Clark MosbacherPresident and CEO

Dorothy AblesDan BellowAstley BlairLeslie BlantonJames CalawayBruce CulpepperJames DannenbaumBill DeLaneyIrma Diaz-GonzalezHarry Gee, Jr.George Y. GonzalezVean J. Gregg, IIIRobert W. HarveyBrenda Hellyer, Ed. D.Paul W. HobbyMichael K. JhinShauna Johnson-ClarkHarris “Shrub” Kempner, Jr.Stephen Klineberg, Ph.D.Renee’ LogansGina LunaStan MarekScott McClellandRuthanne MeffordAdrian PattersonPerry Ann ReedJuanita RomansMorgan SmithAnne TaylorWalter TomlinsonBruce Coulson Tough

ADVISORY COUNCIL

Linda AddisonE. William BarnettRichard CampoChip CarlislePhil ConwayRufus CormierGeorge DeMontrondC. Richard EverettKelly FrelsRoger GalatasThomas D. GrosJohn HofmeisterNed S. HolmesLynne HumphriesGeorge MartinezJohn Mendelsohn, M.D.Steven MillerJohn L. Nau, IIIThe Honorable Annise ParkerJames R. RoyerUmesh VermaThe Honorable Bill WhiteRosie Zamora

CHF STAFFRussell RichardDirector, Leadership and Engagement

Ann Shaw Director, External Relations

Ralph WheelerDirector, Development

John Wilburn Director, Strategic Initiatives

Leigh Ann Arnold Manager, Education

Ashley BartaCoordinator, Donor Relations

Betsy Broyles BreierSenior Manager, Strategic Initiatives

Claudette Harvey Assistant, Leadership and Administration

Cassie A. JonesManager, Leadership and Engagement

Mercedes Santos-GarayManager, Development

Steven ScarboroughManager, Strategic Initiatives

Christy VanZandtCoordinator, Marketing

The cover of this report includes the names of the region’s 532 arts and cultural heritage

organizations as listed in the National Center for Charitable Statistics 2010 core files.