The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.
Note: The Portable Document Format (PDF) of this report includes all tables and charts.
BACKGROUND
Nonprofit organizations are an integral and vital force in our communities. They are often the first line of defense and the last recourse for people in need. They bring arts and cultural programs to local areas, provide an array of health and human services to all age and income groups, and give voice to the concerns of local residents. Because of their close relationship with the community, many grantmakers, politicians, and local residents turn to nonprofits to address important individual, community, and public policy needs. Despite high expectations for what these groups can achieve, communities often lack information about the nonprofits in their areas and what services, activities, and programs these organizations provide.
The purpose of this study is to clarify the activities of nonprofits that are located in the 26 communities in which the Knight Foundation makes grants (see appendix A for a list of these communities). The information on programs and services from the 1998 and 1999 IRS Forms 990 filed annually by the nonprofits, as collected by the National Center for Charitable Statistics, has been classified using the Nonprofit Program Classification (NPC) system (the methodology is described in appendix B). When added to their organizational purposes, the classified programs and activities of nonprofits provide a deeper and more detailed description of what they do in local communities.
KEY FINDINGS
In the 26 Knight communities, 16,801 nonprofit organizations offer 30,191 programs.
There is an abundance of nonprofit activity in the 26 areas in which the Knight Foundation makes grants, but perhaps the most outstanding feature of the nonprofit sector is its diversity. More than one-third of nonprofit programs and organizations focus on human services, such as job training, child care, and elder services (table 1). More than 10,000 human service programs and nearly 6,000 human service nonprofits operate in the 26 communities.
Education and health are also areas in which nonprofits are actively engaged. There are more than 5,000 educational programs and more than 2,800 education-related nonprofits in the Knight communities, making education the second most prevalent type of nonprofit activity. Compared with education, there are slightly fewer nonprofit health programs (4,919) and health-related nonprofits (2,540), but health constitutes ranks third in nonprofit activity in the 26 locations.
There are 3,483 arts and cultural programs and 1,763 arts and cultural nonprofit organizations in the 26 areas. Arts programs are the fourth most numerous programmatic type in the Knight communities (11.5 percent of the programs); however, arts organizations rank fifth among nonprofits, after human services, education, health, and public/societal benefit organizations. A substantial number of arts programs are offered by other than arts organizations, a finding that is detailed further in this report.
The Knight communities vary in the proportion of arts programs compared to all nonprofit programs.
Nearly one-quarter (813) of the arts and cultural programs are located in the San Jose area (table 2). Philadelphia has the second highest number of arts programs (711), and Detroit ranks third with 459 arts programs. The large number of arts programs in these communities reflects their population size. In 2001, Philadelphia and Detroit each had a populations of more than 4 million, while the San Jose area had 3.8 million residents. Of the remaining Knight communities, Miami ranked third in population, but it has the fourth largest number of arts programs (323 in total).
While the biggest communities tend to have more arts programs, Boulder—a mid-sized area of roughly 300,000 residents—has the highest proportion of arts programs to all nonprofit programs. Roughly 1 of every 5 nonprofit programs in Boulder relates to the arts, compared with about 1 in 10 programs for all 26 communities. Support for the arts is particularly strong in Boulder. The Princeton Survey Research Associates (PSRA 1999a) found that nearly 90 percent of Boulder residents had attended an arts or cultural event in the past year, compared with 65 percent nationally (PSRA 2002). Milledgeville, Aberdeen, and Macon also have relatively high percentages of nonprofit arts activity.
But the arts appear to play a minor role in some communities. In Gary, for example, only 17 arts-related programs were identified—4.2 percent of the overall nonprofit programmatic activity in the community. Of the 191 programs in Grand Forks, only 12 (6.3 percent) focus on the arts. Long Beach and Columbus, GA, also have relatively small arts programs. The limited arts activity in some locations may reflect their proximity to large urban arts centers, such as Los Angeles to Long Beach or Chicago to Gary. But it may also suggest relatively modest support for the arts by local residents. For example, in 1999, roughly 16 percent of Gary residents had contributed to arts-related organizations during the past year (PSRA 1999b), compared with 26 percent of Boulder residents (PSRA 1999a).
Nonprofit organizations in the 26 communities reported more than $62 billion in program expenses in 1999. Of these expenditures, roughly $1 billion was spent on arts and cultural programs.
Not surprisingly, the bulk of the $62 billion in program expenses are found in Philadelphia, Detroit, San Jose, Miami, and St. Paul. Nonprofits in these communities reported more than $50 billion in program expenses in 1999 (table 3). The remaining $12 billion is spread across the other Knight locales. Nonprofit program expenses are lowest in Milledgeville, where the 26 programs cost less than $5 million.
The several billion dollars spent on programs by nonprofits in the 26 Knight locales yielded an average per program expenditure of roughly $2.1 million in 1999. Most nonprofits in the 26 communities, however, run relatively small programs. Indeed, the typical or median program cost for nonprofits in the Knight areas was $77,000. The vast difference between average and median program costs is the result of several very large programs offered by nonprofits in the health and higher education fields. For example, the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals in San Jose reported program expenses on their Form 990 of roughly $4.8 billion in 1999. Four other groups reported programs that cost more than $1 billion during this period. These groups include the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia; Trinity Health and the Henry Ford Health System in Detroit; and the Community Health Plan in San Jose. Taken together, the program costs reported by these nonprofit organizations equaled $10.2 billion in 1999.
Program expenses in the arts tend to be particularly small compared with other types of nonprofit activities.
On average, nonprofits spent roughly $2.4 million on each non-arts program in 1999, compared with $317,000 per arts and cultural program. Looking at median program costs, nonprofits spent roughly half as much per arts activity ($38,000) as on other types of programs ($87,000).
Of course, spending on arts programs varies considerably across the 26 communities. Average program costs range from $990,000 in Long Beach (driven largely by three arts programs supported by the RMS Foundation that totaled $25 million) to $19,000 in Milledgeville. In some locations, a relatively high percentage of nonprofit program spending is in the arts. For instance, while spending on the arts constitutes roughly 1.8 percent of program expenses in the 26 communities, it constitutes nearly 8 percent of program expenditures in St. Paul. Other Knight communities where spending on arts programs is relatively high are Bradenton, FL (6.7 percent of all program expenses) and Columbus, GA (5.7 percent). But in other locales, only a tiny fraction of program expenditures focuses on the arts. In Aberdeen, for example, only half of one penny of each dollar spent by nonprofits on programs and services relates to arts activities.
Arts programs in local communities are significantly more numerous than "traditional" arts organizations.
Taking an inventory of arts and cultural opportunities in local communities has typically meant counting the number of arts organizations. But simply identifying arts-related groups significantly underestimates the arts and cultural options for local residents. In the Knight communities, there are 1,763 traditional arts nonprofits, but 3,483 arts and cultural programs were identified from the activities listed by all nonprofits (table 4). Thus, the number of arts and culture opportunities for local residents is much greater if the entire nonprofit sector is considered.
Nearly one-quarter of arts and cultural programs in the Knight communities are provided by nonprofits, which are not classified as arts organizations.
Many types of nonprofits have arts and cultural programs in local communities. While more than three-quarters of the nearly 3,500 arts programs are provided by traditional arts groups, one-quarter are offered by other types of nonprofits (figure 1). More than 7 percent of arts programs in the 26 locations are offered by public and societal benefit organizations, which work to improve community conditions through civil rights, capacity building, philanthropy, and research. For example, the Riverview Economic Development Association in St. Paul provides a cultural awareness program and the Cuyahoga Valley Association in Akron has held a local cultural festival. Education and human service nonprofits each provide roughly 6 percent of arts and cultural programs in the 26 communities. Health-related, environmental, and international groups provide a handful of arts programs. Religion-related groups are least likely to supply arts activities.
The reliance on alternative arts providers varies substantially across communities. All of the arts programs in Aberdeen, Milledgeville, and Myrtle Beach are provided by traditional arts groups (table 5), while alternative providers supply nearly half (47.1 percent) of the arts and cultural initiatives in Gary. Roughly 30 percent of arts programs in Detroit and Akron are provided by public and societal benefit, education, and other types of nonprofits. San Jose, Lexington, Columbia, and Charlotte rely on nontraditional groups to supply more than one-quarter of their arts programs.
This finding is difficult to interpret, because the development of arts programs by alternative providers does not relate to the size of the community's arts sector, available revenue in the arts at the local level, or basic demographic characteristics of the community, such as median household income or population. It is likely, however, that a latent need for services, the entrepreneurial activity of alternative providers, and a host of other factors has stimulated the entry of alternative providers in the arts field.
Performing arts constitute the most common type of arts and cultural program in the 26 Knight communities.
More than one-third (or 1,226 in total) of the arts programs focus on the performing arts, including dance, music, opera, and theater (table 6). Media and communication programs, such as broadcasting, film programs, journalism programs, and publishing, are the second most numerous type of arts program in the Knight communities, with 642 (18 percent of all arts activities). Other major types of programs are history and historical (12.3 percent), museum (9.2 percent), and cultural heritage (8.2 percent).
Traditional arts providers tend to focus on the performing arts, while alternative nonprofits tend to provide media and communications programs.
Arts nonprofits are roughly 2.5 times more likely to have performing arts programs than nontraditional arts providers. In contrast, groups formed to provide education, human services, and other non-arts activities are more than three times more likely to focus on media and communications programs. This finding makes sense, because dance, musical, and theatrical productions typically require dedicated space for performances and capital investments in lighting, instruments, and other equipment. While communications and media programs also require investment, nontraditional arts groups may be able to use existing equipment (for instance, computers at local libraries) to provide services.
Capital investment may also affect the availability of museum programs. In the Knight communities, traditional arts organizations are twice as likely as alternative providers to provide museum activities. Museums typically require substantial revenue to build their endowments and fixed assets and to acquire collections to display. Therefore, it makes sense that only 5 percent of the programs offered by nontraditional arts groups focus on museum-related activities.
DISCUSSION
This analysis reveals several key points about the role of nonprofits in providing arts-related programs to local communities and illustrates variations among the Knight communities. An examination of the sizes (budgets, number of beneficiaries or customers, etc.) of the various programs offered might help identify the conditions that lead to the provision of arts programs by other-than-arts nonprofits.
The analysis also reveals that some arts communities are relatively small and struggling. Gary, for example, ranks near the bottom in the number of arts programs and traditional arts providers, as well as the extent to which alternative nonprofits are supplying cultural initiatives to the community. In contrast, San Jose has a vibrant arts sector, at least by the measures used in this analysis.
But the most important finding of this analysis is that much of the nonprofit activity in local communities is hidden in individual programs and initiatives. If one were to count only the number of arts organizations in the 26 Knight communities, one would miss roughly 25 percent of arts and cultural activities. This finding is particularly significant because most efforts to evaluate nonprofit capacity start with an inventory or census of active organizations in local communities. This is a necessary and important first step in using nonprofits to effectively address local problems and enhance community life. But to understand the array of potential options and resources for local communities, one must dig deeper to unveil the multitude of programs, activities, and initiatives offered by nonprofit organizations.
REFERENCES
Princeton Survey Research Associates. (1999a). John S. and James L. Knight Foundation Community Indicators Project: A Report on Public Opinion in Boulder, Colorado. Princeton, NJ.
Princeton Survey Research Associates. (1999b). John S. and James L. Knight Foundation Community Indicators Project: A Report on Public Opinion in Gary, Indiana. Princeton, NJ.
Princeton Survey Research Associates. (2002). John S. and James L. Knight Foundation Community Indicators Project: A Summary Report of National Public Opinion on Local Issues. Princeton, NJ.
Twombly, Eric C., and Lampkin, Linda M. (2001). An Analysis of Arts and Cultural Programs in Four Communities Using the Nonprofit Program Classification System. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
This report is available in its entirety in the Portable Document Format (PDF).
Latest Research
Browse by Topic:
PDF
Printer-friendly summary
