Category: Research Sharing

Brand new research that was shared with the listserv on a monthly basis.

November 2018

1. The Berk Foundation. “Social Impact of the Arts Study.” ArtsFund. 2018. United States.

The ArtsFund Social Impact of the Arts Study frames a new way of understanding the public value of the arts in King County. With primary focus on youth development & education, health & wellness, and neighborhood vitality, the study probes the potential for arts to influence more equitable outcomes. The report combines a county-wide public poll; a landscape scan of King County arts, cultural, and heritage nonprofits; a substantive review of 150+ national research resources; and case studies of ten regional arts organizations.


2. Rick Reyes and Mytoan Nguyen-Akbar. “Creative Strategies for Career Connected Learning: Youth Voice in the Media Classroom.” Seattle Office of Arts & Culture. 2018. United States.

A report on ways to incorporate creative skills and media-based skills into the curriculum for youth in the Seattle area. Several recommendations emerged from survey responses which included direct quotes from youth, collected anonymously, about what youth enjoy in their media arts Career and Technical Education (CTE) courses and their career aspirations as they relate to the arts. They are supplemented by insights generated by in depth interviews conducted with creatives in media arts occupations in Seattle.


3. Jessica Vu, Yash Tulsyan, Geoffrey Gund, and Chuan Fan. “Reimagining King Street Station through a Racial Equity and Social Justice Lens.” University of Washington. 2018. United States.

The Seattle Office of Arts & Culture (ARTS) is opening a publicly accessible cultural space in King Street Station (KSS). ARTS intends to make KSS a space that works to dismantle institutional racism in and through the arts by supporting, advocating for, and prioritizing arts programming by and for communities of color and historically marginalized populations. The following report presents research and analysis on best practices related to promoting racial equity in cultural spaces.


4. Tasha Golden and Jamie Hand. “Arts, Culture, and Community Mental Health.” Community Development Innovation Review. 2018. United States.

Based on an analysis of dozens of projects, a literature review, and input from both arts and public health‒sector leaders, Tasha Golden identified several domains where arts and cultural strategies are helping drive change in community health outcomes, or to the systems in which public health practitioners operate. Among these domains, what quickly stood out was the impact of creative placemaking on mental health—including stigma; trauma; community-level stress, depression, and substance use disorders; and cultural identity. Here we have taken these four categories as a frame, describing their relevance to public health and providing examples of initiatives that address them. Our findings suggest that infusing community development with creativity and collaboration stimulates the potential for unique mental health benefits that warrant continued investment and exploration.


5. Carla Vásquez-Noriega, Cameron Okeke, Sino Esthappan, and Mark Treskon. “Creative Placemaking and Community Safety.” The Urban Institute. 2018. United States.

To better understand how creative placemaking can enhance community safety, the Urban Institute studied several creative placemaking efforts, examining their design, implementation, challenges, and successes. The goal of this work is to inform others interested in understanding how creative placemaking improves community safety and how to measure these interventions’ effectiveness.

October 2018

These are recent reports that have just been added to the CultureLab Library. Similar to last month’s research share, articles this month focus on shifts happening in the arts landscape, including public perceptions, creative placemaking, and funding.

A reminder to reach out to me if you would like to see something featured in the research share. Remember that if you do not yet have access to the CultureLab Library, you can request access on the log-in page.

1. National Association of Latino Arts Organizations. “A Call to Collaborate: Continued Inequity in Funding Houston Latinx Arts Organizations.” 2018. United States.

This report from NALAC highlights dramatic funding disparities for Latino arts and cultural organizations in Houston. The research looks at the state of arts funding in Houston from 2010 to 2015, analyzing disbursements of the Houston Hotel Occupancy Tax and four prominent Houston foundations. While Houston’s Latino communities represent 44% of the population, current support for Latino arts and culture is not proportional by any measure. The report’s launch offers an opportunity for public and private stakeholders to collaborate and find solutions to equity issues.


2. Philippe Schneider, Sarah Thelwall, Richard Turpin, Patrick Towell, and Sophia Woodley. Arts Council England. “What is Resilience Anyways?” 2018. United Kingdom.

Arts Council England commissioned Golant Media Ventures and The Audience Agency to research how resilience is currently understood in the arts and culture sector – and whether the understanding of funders and policymakers is congruent with that of others within the sector. The new study, said to be the first substantive piece of research on resilience published by ACE since 2010, involved experts, academics and practitioners in the sector. The findings are drawn from a wide range of sources, including a literature review, interviews and over 1,000 responses to a survey.


3. Americans for the Arts. “Americans Speak Out About The Arts in 2018.” 2018. United States.

Americans Speak Out About The Arts in 2018 is the second in a series of national public opinion surveys about the arts (the first was conducted in 2015). The poll was conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs during the week of May 9-16, 2018.


4. Chelsea A. Allinger, Danielle Lewinski, Anne Gadwa Nicodemus, Susan Fitter Harris, and Rachel Engh. Metris Arts Consulting and Center for Community Progress. “Creative Placemaking on Vacant Properties: Lessons Learned from Four Cities.” 2018. United States.

In 2017, Center for Community Progress engaged Metris to support an exploration of using creative placemaking on vacant properties to foster equitable revitalization. Throughout the project, interdisciplinary cohorts from four cities participated in learning exchanges to gain knowledge and tools.


5. Department of Canadian Heritage. “Government of Canada Survey of Heritage Institutions.” 2018. Canada.

The Department of Canadian Heritage is pleased to present the third iteration of the Government of Canada Survey of Heritage Institutions. The 2017 survey captured financial and operating data on not-for-profit heritage institutions in Canada for the 2015 data year, as well as building and capital infrastructure data for the 2017 data year.

September 2018

This month’s research share contains articles that in some way address the shifts that are happening at the intersection of the arts and the public. Doeser and Kim assess models for governing cultural districts, Duncombe looks at the impact of artistic activism, Courage and McKeown compile the ever-expanding body of literature on creative placemaking, and Steven Hadley and Eleonora Belfiore challenge approaches to cultural democracy.

Thanks to the CRN members who contributed to this month’s research share. A reminder to reach out to me if you would like to see something featured next month. Remember that if you do not yet have access to the CultureLab Library, you can request access on the log-in page.

1. James Doeser and Anna Marazuela Kim. Global Cultural Districts Network. “Governance Models of Cultural Districts.” 2018. United Kingdom.

This report, commissioned by the Global Cultural Districts Network (GCDN), draws on primary research and a literature review to capture good practices, and identifies which stakeholders should be “at the table” for informed and effective decision making and oversight. The research has also revealed the range of business models that underpin these governing entities, reviewing how cultural districts are generating revenue and expending it. The research is intended to be fully international in scope, with useful lessons for GCDN members and other practitioners around the world.


2. Stephen Duncombe. The Center for Artistic Activism. “Assessing the Impact of Artistic Activism.” 2018. United States.

“Assessing the Impact of Artistic Activism” is an exploration of the impact of artistic forms of activism: how the affect and effect of the practice have been theorized, how it’s understood by cultural institutions and, based upon more than 50 interviews with practitioners, how artistic activists think what they do, how it works, how they know if it works, and what “working” even means in the context of a hybrid practice that mixes the arts and activism.


3. Francesca Sanderson, et al. Nesta. Experimental Culture: A Horizon Scan Commissioned by Arts Council England. 2018. United Kingdom.

This report, commissioned by the Arts Council and developed by Nesta, provides insights and recommendations on how arts and cultural organizations in the United Kingdom should evolve over the next 10 years in order to adapt the ever changing ways we consume arts and culture.


4. Cara Courage and Anita  McKeown (editors). Routledge. “Creative Placemaking: Research, Theory and Practice.” 2018. United States & United Kingdom.

The book brings together a range of scholars to critique and deconstruct the notion of creative placemaking, presenting diverse case studies from researcher, practitioner, funder and policymaker perspectives from across the globe. It opens with the creators of the 2010 White Paper that named and defined creative placemaking, Ann Markusen and Anne Gadwa Nicodemus, who offer a cortically reflexive narrative on the founding of the sector and its development. This book looks at vernacular creativity in place, a topic continued through the book with its focus on the practitioner and community-placed projects. It closes with a consideration of aesthetics, metrics and, from the editors, a consideration of the next ten years for the sector.


5. Eleonora Belfiore and Steven Hadley. Cultural Trends (Vol 27, No 3). “Cultural Democracy and Cultural Policy.” 2018. United Kingdom.

Steven Hadley and Eleonora Belfiore review existing literature and initiatives regarding cultural democracy and argue for a more thorough questioning of existing hierarchies.

August 2018

1. Greater Pittsburgh Arts Council. “Racial Equity and Arts Funding in Greater Pittsburgh.” 2018. United States.

“Racial Equity and Arts Funding in Greater Pittsburgh” is the result of a yearlong study of hundreds of arts organizations, primary data from 20 local funders (public and private), and secondary data from publicly available resources. The research was convened by a group of 12 local arts leaders, researchers and funders who formed the Learning and Leadership Committee under the auspices of the Greater Pittsburgh Arts Council. This Committee, a group comprised primarily of people of color, informed the core questions, frameworks, and context for the research, which was conducted by the Greater Pittsburgh Arts Council. The report reveals a stark contrast between funding for White-majority organizations and ALAANA organizations, with key findings including disparities in the number of arts grants, total amounts of funds, and the average amount of grant dollars received by ALAANA organizations* when compared with White/Non-Hispanic organizations.


2. Zannie Giraud Voss and Glenn Voss. National Center for Arts Research. “Arts Vibrancy Index (2018).” United States.

In this report, we highlight and celebrate communities of every size and in every region that have cultivated higher levels of arts activity per person living in the community. We use the term “vibrancy” in keeping with Merriam-Webster’s definition of the word to mean “pulsating with life, vigor, or activity.” To assess arts vibrancy across America, we incorporate multiple measures under three main rubrics: supply, demand, and public support for arts and culture on a per capita basis. We gauge supply as total arts providers, demand with measures of total nonprofit arts dollars in the community, and public support as state and federal arts funding. We use multiple measures since vibrancy can manifest in many ways.


3. Carole Rosenstein. “Understanding Cultural Policy.” 2018. United States.

Understanding Cultural Policy provides a practical, comprehensive introduction to thinking about how and why governments intervene in the arts and culture. Cultural policy expert Carole Rosenstein examines the field through comparative, historical, and administrative lenses, while engaging directly with the issues and tensions that plague policy-makers across the world, including issues of censorship, culture-led development, cultural measurement, and globalization.


4. Kirsty Hoyle, Melanie Sharpe, and Matthew Cock. Arts Council England. “State of Theatre Access 2017.” United Kingdom.

In 2016, VocalEyes published the State of Museum Access 2016 report presenting the results of an audit of 1700 UK museum websites: based on the premise that a lack of access information contributed significantly to lower attendance among disabled people. It cited evidence that disabled people rely on pre-visit information far more than non-disabled people; using a venue’s website is a vital step in the decision-making / planning process. The absence of useful access information lowers people’s confidence that barriers to access will be addressed at the venue itself, and they may change their mind about visiting, feeling excluded from the venue’s target audience. This report applies the same principle and audit methodology, with our researchers visiting the websites of 659 professional theatres, all of which programme performing arts, auditing their access information, and any mention of access services or resources. We omitted from the survey amateur, school and college theatres, and those whose programming was predominantly live music, film or stand-up comedy.


5. Ben Walmsley. Poetics. “From Arts Marketing to Audience Enrichment.” 2016. United Kingdom.

The paper describes a project that used a bespoke online platform to allow the public to commission, interact with and reflect upon two dance performances at Yorkshire Dance in Leeds, a city in northern England. The research was interested in knowing how the platform might deepen audience engagement, break down barriers to attendance, demystify the creative process, and enhance people’s appreciation of the work. Overall, they found that the platform was a powerful way to move audience engagement beyond something ‘transactional’ or momentary into a deeper and more reflective encounter. However, this only worked for a small sample of the participants, as many dropped out of the study, while some others felt that it prevented them from experiencing the more ‘instinctive’ responses they were hoping to get from the work in its finished form. Overall, the research found that those who might gain most from engaging with the platform were those least likely to use it.

July 2018

1. Jill Hanley and Sandra D. Sjollema. Community Development Journal. “When Words Arrive: A Qualitative Study of Poetry as a Community Development Tool.” 2014. Canada.

Poetry, among the arts, remains understudied as a means for community development. To address this scarcity, this paper considers the use of poetry as a community development tool and discusses its uniqueness in this role. It offers a description and analysis of an exploratory, qualitative research study carried out with twelve respondents in Montreal, Canada, who participated in community-based creative writing groups. Evaluation suggested that, overall, the poetry groups made a positive contribution to community building and development. This paper locates the study in the context of community development and the arts and includes references to poetry therapy and social action-based creative writing. It also raises questions as to why poetry has not found its place on the agenda of arts-based community development.


2. Hidde Bekhuis, Natascha Notten, and Gerbert Kraaykamp. Cultural Trends. “Highbrow Cultural Participation of Turks and Moroccans in the Netherlands.” 2015. The Netherlands.

Focusing on Turkish and Moroccan communities, this paper examines educational attainment (highest level reached), national identification (the extent to which migrants identified with the Netherlands) and social integration (number of Dutch friends) as possible factors to explain why these communities are less likely than to engage in highbrow cultural activities. As expected, highly educated migrants and those in full-time education attended highbrow cultural events more often than other migrants. More identification with Dutch society led to more cultural engagement. Migrants with social networks containing more Dutch friends and more highly education friends were more likely to engage in highbrow culture. Of these factors, the level of education was the most important in determining highbrow cultural engagement.


3. Arlene Goldbard. U.S. Department of Arts and Culture. “Art Became Oxygen: An Artistic Response Guide.” 2017. United States.

As natural disasters and social emergencies multiply, the need has grown for ethical, creative, and effective artistic response—arts-based work responding to disaster or other community-wide emergency, much of it created in collaboration with community members directly affected. Art Became The Oxygen was created to engage readers who share the intention of offering care and compassion and helping to create possibility in the midst or wake of crisis.


4. Shelley Trott and Gina Acebo. Creative Equity Research Partners. “Mapping Small Arts and Culture Organizations of Color in Oakland.” 2018. United States.

This project was commissioned by Akonadi Foundation and the Kenneth Rainin Foundation to address the lack of research on small, grassroots arts and culture organizations serving communities of color in Oakland, California. This research investigates the specificity of this sector of the ecosystem—its geography, existing infrastructure, assets, and challenges. By aggregating and analyzing the limited data on these organizations, interviewing a diverse cohort of stakeholders, and gathering existing research on organizations of color and the informal arts sector, this research project takes a first step toward understanding a complex and vibrant sector that builds social bonds, addresses community needs, and contributes to a strong sense of place in Oakland.


5. Alan Kay. Community Development Journal. “Art and Community Development: the Role the Arts have in Regenerating Communities.” 2000. United Kingdom.

The arts are often considered to be at the periphery of the community development process and only a minor player in regenerating areas. Despite increasing globalization, communities are beginning to recognize their own identity, culture, traditional art forms and the value of working together at a local level. This paper is based on a recent study which shows that the arts have a role in regeneration and at a local level can be used as a tool within a wider community development programme.

June 2018

1. Susannah Laramee Kidd and Sara Daleiden. Los Angeles County Arts Commission. “Civic Art as Infrastructure.” 2018. United States.

This report and documentary is an evaluation of a range of outcomes at the four sites in the Creative Graffiti Abatement Project at two parks and libraries in the 2nd Supervisorial District of L.A. The report evaluates the success of arts-based strategies in shifting perceptions, increasing positive activity, reducing graffiti vandalism, building a sense of community ownership and building capacity for future arts and culture activities at the sites. Ultimately, the report highlights the role of embedding meaningful engagement activities in public art as an important aspect of government investment in communities.


2. Yuha Jung. The Journal of Arts Management, Law & Society. “Economic Discussion of Conflict between Public Education Policies and Common Good Arts in the United States.” 2018. United States.

Arts education in the United States, especially in public schools, has been neglected and its public funding has decreased. This is partly due to the difference in the conception of public education policies and the arts. The theory of economic goods and an analysis of two current education policies demonstrate that public education is treated as a public good that is needed by all people, and therefore funded with tax dollars. Because the arts are common goods that different people value in their own terms, education in the arts is treated as nonessential and funded sporadically in public school settings. Based on the theory of the commons, the author suggests that nonprofit arts organizations are equipped to deal with the common good and diverse nature of the arts and can provide sustainable arts education that fills the gap of arts education in public schools.

3. Rebecca Thomas and Zannie Voss. National Center for Arts Research at SMU. “Five Steps to Healthier Working Capital.” 2018. United States.

In its “Working Capital Report,” NCAR found on average, arts and culture organizations had working capital equivalent to five months’ worth of total expenses. While this might seem like a comfortable cushion, it reflects very high levels of working capital concentrated among a minority of institutions. Working capital levels varied by arts and cultural sectors. Skewed by large institutions, art museums had average working capital of more than one year, while orchestras on average had only approximately 15 days of working capital.


4. Pieter de Rooij and Marcel Bastiaansen. The Journal of Arts Management, Law & Society. “Understanding and Measuring Consumption Motives in the Performing Arts.” 2017. The Netherlands.

This study sought to understand and categorise the reasons why people visit performing arts events, as well as develop a way to measure these motivations. In-depth interviews were conducted with theatre-goers and a review of the literature was undertaken. This then informed a questionnaire which was completed by people attending a classical music concert. The results show that there is both a cultural and social side to attending performing arts events.


5. Daniel Wheatley and Craig Bickerton. Journal of Cultural Economics. “Subjective Well-Being and Engagement in Arts, Culture and Sport.”  2017. United Kingdom.

This study explored the relationship between an individual’s self-assessment of their overall wellbeing and taking part in arts, cultural and sporting activities. Social survey data from 40,000 UK households was collected in 2010-2011 and analysed to identify measures of wellbeing defined as satisfaction with life, leisure time, job and general happiness. They found that engagement in most arts, culture and sport activities is associated with greater life and leisure satisfaction and general happiness.

May 2018

1. Alexandre Frenette. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society. “The Rise of Creative Placemaking.” 2017. United States.

This article situates the emergence of the creative placemaking policy initiative as the coordinated continuation of longstanding artistic practices and a reaction to scant funding in the United States.


2. Anita McKeown. Seismopolitie Journal of Art and Politics. “Creative Placemaking: How to embed Arts-led processes within cultural regeneration?” 2016. Norway.

Trialled in London, Ireland and the U.S.A. by an itinerant artist-in-residence, this summary outlines the emergence of creative placemaking and the aims of ASU’s research; to enshrine the dynamic, emergent and ethical qualities of permaculture design within a Situated Arts Practice to contributes to the on-going evolution of creative placemaking.


3. Marian Stuiver, Pat van der Jagt, Eugene van Erven, and Isabel Hoving. Community Development Journal. “The Potentials of Art to Involve Citizens in Regional Transitions.” 2013. The Netherlands.

In this article, researches asked whether artwork based on narratives and created in collaboration between artists and local residents can help planners achieve a more community-based process for planning.


4. Anna Muessig, Jamie Hand, et al. Cultural Research Network. “Impacts of Creative Placemaking.” 2017. Virtual Study Group.

On July 11th, the Cultural Research Network hosted a webinar about the impacts of Creative Placemaking, which included a review of ArtPlace’s research findings. These findings involved nearly two years of a comprehensive, multi-year research initiative to unearth promising practices and trends at the intersection of community development sectors with arts and culture.


5. Tom Andrews, Catherine Bunting, Tina Corri, and Sarah Fox. People United. “Changing the World through Arts and Kindness.” 2017. United Kingdom.

In this report, People United explores how the arts can inspire kindness, community and social change. The report brings together 10 years of research to show that the arts can play a role in building a kinder, more caring society.

April 2018

1. Yuliya Shymko and Thomas J. Roulet. Academy of Management Journal. “When does Medici hurt DaVinci?” Russia. 2016.

Does corporate philanthropy have an indiscriminately positive effect on recipients? Our baseline argument asserts that relationships with stakeholders outside the field, such as corporate donors, can be perceived as a deviation from the dominant logic at the industry level, and thus as a negative signal by peers. How can recipients mitigate this adverse effect on social evaluations? To answer this question, the authors study how corporate benefaction affects the process of peer recognition in the context of Russian theaters from 2004 to 2011.


2. MTM London. Nesta. “Repayable finance in the arts and culture sector.” 2018. United Kingdom.

This research was undertaken by market research agency MTM London into the current and future demand for repayable finance in the UK’s arts and cultural sector. Over 1,000 organisations from across the country took part, 70 per cent of which were asset-locked entities such as charities and community interest companies.


3. Wesley Mendes Da-Silva, Journal of Cultural Economics. “The impacts of fundraising periods and geographic distance on financing music production via crowdfunding in Brazil.” 2016. Brazil.

This paper examined crowdfunded music projects in Brazil. By using an online platform, crowdfunding has the potential to overcome geographic barriers and the limitations of entrepreneurs’ existing social networks.


4. Ian David Moss. Createquity. “The Last Word: Recommendations for Arts Philanthropists.” 2017. United States.

This article summarizes lessons learned, as well as recommendations going forward for foundations, government agencies, individual philanthropists, and others providing resources to support the arts.


5. HM Government. “Creative Industries: sector deal.” 2018. United Kingdom.

Led by the Creative Industries Council and with critical input from the Creative Industries Federation and other leading voices across the sector, this deal will invest more than £150m across the lifecycle of creative businesses.

March 2018

1. Alexander Schlegela, et al. NeuroImage. “The Artist Emerges: Visual Art Learning Alters Neural Structure and Function.” 2015. United States.

This study investigated the impact of visual art training on young adults’ behaviour and changes in brain activity. The study found that the art students became more creative via the reorganization of prefrontal white matter but did not find any significant changes in perceptual ability or related neural activity in the art students relative to the control group.


2. Simon P. Landry and François Champoux. Brain and Cognition. “Musicians React Faster and Are Better Multisensory Integrators.” 2017. Canada.

This study aimed to investigate whether long-term musical training improves unisensory (audio or tactile) and multisensory (audio and tactile) processing capacities. It found that musical training improves ability for single and multiple sensory systems.


3. David Gerry, Andrea Unrau, and Laurel J. Trainor. Developmental Science. “Active Music Classes in Infancy Enhance Musical, Communicative and Social Development.” 2012. Canada.

To understand the developmental impact of active participation in music, this study worked with two groups of six-month old infants who attended music-based sessions with teachers and their parents. The results indicate that (1) infants can engage in meaningful musical training when appropriate pedagogical approaches are used, (2) active musical participation in infancy enhances culture-specific musical acquisition, and (3) active musical participation in infancy impacts social and communication development.


4. Paul M Camic, Sabina Hulbert, and Jeremy Kimmel. Journal of Health Psychology. “Museum Object Handling: A Health-Promoting Community-Based Activity for Dementia Care.” United Kingdom. 2017.

The authors of this study propose that the heritage sector could have a role to play in the wellbeing of people with dementia. For most people with early- to middle-stage dementia, handling museum objects in a supportive group environment increases subjective wellbeing and should be considered part of a health promotion strategy in dementia care.


5. Eleanor D. Brown, et. al. Child Development. “Can the Arts Get Under the Skin? Arts and Cortisol for Economically Disadvantaged Children.” 2016. United States

This study followed more than 300 four year-olds attending a specialised Head Start preschool program in Philadelphia that incorporated an arts enrichment program. Implications of the study concern the impact of arts on cortisol for children facing poverty risks.

February 2018

1. Victoria Atec-Amestoy and Anna Villarroya. Social Observatory of “La Caixa.” “Cultural Participation and Wellbeing.” 2018. Spain.

Culture plays an important role in constructing and consolidating the bases for social cohesion and inclusion and for individual and collective wellbeing. The fourth issue of the Dossier from the Social Observatory of “la Caixa” analyses the factors that determine the cultural participation of citizens and reflects on how to guarantee equal conditions for such participation.


2. John Knell and Alison Whitaker. Arts Council England. “Participatory Metrics Report.” 2016. United Kingdom.

Culture Counts, working with Arts Council England, developed a short list of cultural organisations that were invited to take part in this participatory metrics strand.  The aim was to not only improve the metrics and check their alignment with the quality principles but also to analyse the extent to which they were grouping together in natural clusters, in terms of which aspects of the participatory process and associated outcomes they were measuring. Eleven cultural organisations within this strand carried out 24 evaluations collectively.


3. Riikka Anttonen et. al. Sibelius Academy. “Managing Art Projects with Societal Impact.” 2016. Estonia.

This Study Book presents the multiple dimensions of societal impact of arts projects and to provide methods on areas such as impact design, leadership or evaluation. The book is particularly called a ‘study book’, aiming not to give direct answers, but to open avenues for students and practitioners to reflect and learn to create their own way of managing art project with societal impact.


4. Shared Intelligence, The Mighty Creatives, and Sarah Pickthall. Arts Council England. “Testing the Accessibility of Arts Council England’s Quality and Participatory Metrics.” 2017. United Kingdom.

Arts Council England’s system of Quality and Participatory Metrics is a new tool designed to gather opinion data from audiences and participants in arts experiences. Each ‘metric’ consists of a dimension, the specific aspect of a production that is being measured, and a statement which is presented to respondents who are asked the extent they agree or disagree. Each metric statement has been designed to test a particular aspect or dimension of ‘quality’.


5. Bronwyn Mauldin. Los Angeles County Arts Commission. “Research & Evaluation at the Los Angeles County Arts Commission: 2016-17 Report.” 2017. United States.

Report from the LA Arts commission on the 2016-17 Research and Evaluation Plan: what they did and why, and some key lessons learned along the way.