field reflections on education and community …tcg.org/pdfs/education/specialrepedu2016.pdfto top...

SPEC IAL REPORT ON EDUCAT ION F E A T U R I N G

F I E L D R E F L E C T I O N S O N E D U C A T I O N A N D C O M M U N I T Y E N G A G E M E N T

P R O G R A M S A N D D E P A R T M E N T S T R U C T U R E S

A N D F I N D I N G S F R O M

T C G E D U C A T I O N S U R V E Y 2 0 1 6 A N D T C G F I S C A L S U R V E Y 2 0 1 6

I N T R O D U C T I O N B Y L A U R I E M . B A S K I N D I R E C T O R O F R E S E A R C H , P O L I C Y & C O L L E C T I V E A C T I O N , T C G

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 8

Each year since 1999, TCG has produced a Special Report on Education (formerly the Education Centerpiece), which is comprised of three sections: a narrative portion that offers voices from the field a platform from which to speak about a specific education‐related topic; a presentation of the data from the annual TCG Education Survey, which focuses on programming, demographics served, and staffing; and education‐related data from the annual TCG Fiscal Survey, including earned income, contributed income, and expenses. TCG’s Department of Research, Policy & Collective Action hopes that this report provides a wealth of information about education programs across the field and, together with the online Education Survey reporting tool, serves as a resource for theatre professionals and educators. This Special Report on Education presents data from TCG Education Survey 2016 and TCG Fiscal Survey 2016, which were conducted in 2017. Following that round of surveys, TCG moved to a biennial cycle for the TCG Education Survey (the TCG Fiscal Survey continues to be conducted annually). The next Education Survey will be launched this winter. For this Special Report, we have focused the narrative portion on education and community engagement programs and department structures at a number of theatres—some include education and community engagement under the same umbrella, while some have separate departments for those two types of work. Some theatres have moved away from education and solely into community engagement. How are “education” and “community engagement” defined by each theatre? What are the similarities and differences between these two areas of focus? Is there collaboration across departments in this work? There has been growing attention to these issues in recent years, and we were interested in collecting some stories and exploring different models and approaches to this work. We invited pieces by the education directors of seven TCG Member Theatres that participated in Education Survey 2016. The contributing theatres are diverse in terms size, location, history, mission, and perspective. The narratives they shared reflect different approaches and choices by these theatres. The TCG Special Report on Education 2016 was written by Gregory J. Cooper, education & collective action associate; Ilana B. Rose, associate director of research & collective action; and Laurie M. Baskin, director of research, policy & collective action. The authors would like to thank the writers whose pieces follow this introduction and everyone who filled out TCG Education Survey 2016 and TCG Fiscal Survey 2016.

Copyright © October, 2018—Theatre Communications Group

For over 55 years, Theatre Communications Group (TCG), the national organization for U.S. theatre, has existed to strengthen, nurture, and promote the professional not‐for‐profit theatre. TCG’s constituency has grown from a handful of groundbreaking theatres to over 700 Member Theatres and affiliate organizations and more than 12,000 individuals nationwide. TCG offers its members networking and knowledge‐building opportunities through conferences, events, research, and communications; awards grants, approximately $2 million per year, to theatre companies and individual artists; advocates on the federal level; and through the Global Theater Initiative, TCG's partnership with the Laboratory for Global Performance and Politics, serves as the U.S. Center of the International Theatre Institute. TCG is North America’s largest independent publisher of dramatic literature, with 16 Pulitzer Prizes for Best Play on the TCG booklist. It also publishes the award‐winning American Theatre magazine and ARTSEARCH®, the essential source for a career in the arts. In all of its endeavors, TCG seeks to increase the organizational efficiency of its Member Theatres, cultivate and celebrate the artistic talent and achievements of the field, and promote a larger public understanding of, and appreciation for, the theatre. www.tcg.org

F I E L D R E F L E C T I O N S O N E D U C A T I O N A N D C OMM U N I T Y

E N G A G E M E N T P R O G R A M S A N D S T R U C T U R E S

A N O I S E W I T H I N

A L I C I A G R E E N , D I R E C T O R O F E D U C A T I O N A N D C O M M U N I T Y O U T R E A C H P A S A D E N A , C A

Our education department strives to provide students and educators with a deeper connection to the arts by making the theatre an accessible, enlightening, and fun space of learning. We are able to do this through our in‐depth programming that creates numerous opportunities for engagement including our student matinees, workshops, professional‐development opportunities, and conservatory classes. Our student matinee performances are offered for every play produced in a season, and each SMAT (as we fondly call them) includes pre‐show activities with our professional teaching artists as well as a post‐show conversation with the actors. All of our student tickets (both to SMATs and evening performances) are significantly subsidized, and many schools receive additional financial support, ensuring that a school’s lack of funding never prevents students from experiencing the theatre. Last year alone, we were able to provide these subsidized tickets to 16,000+ students and teachers, with 3,294 of the students receiving major scholarships. We also know that sometimes it can be difficult to organize a group of students—that’s why we offer special promo codes for teachers to give to their students, and student rush tickets are available at all performances. Through these promotions, students can come on their own time but still benefit from discounted tickets. For educators who want to dive even deeper, we offer tailored workshops, residencies, and full‐school partnerships. These different engagement opportunities allow teachers to connect A Noise Within’s productions to their own curriculum and create a holistic experience for their students. As a department, we know that it is not only important to service students with our programming; we appreciate that it is equally vital to provide special opportunities to educators to help them feel a sense of community within the arts, and to foster professional and personal growth. These factors inspired us to host special Tickets for Teachers (T4T) nights as well as two free professional‐development events throughout the year. At T4T nights, which are offered for all ANW productions, educators are given complimentary tickets to the show, and invited to a special reception to mingle with other educators and ANW staff. As for other professional‐development events, we throw an Educator Extravaganza in the summer that focuses on theatre‐based experiential learning, and a spring event centered around Shakespeare. Participants not only come away from these events with new tools for their classrooms—they also have one heck of a good time. How could you not have fun at an event with a mask‐making table and a prize wheel? To top this all off, we have an ever‐growing conservatory program that offers classes throughout the year to students of all ages. Our Summer with Shakespeare program, which takes over the building during the summer, now has more than 150 students. Our incredible teaching artists give these students the opportunity to unleash their creativity, learn stagecraft, and perform onstage while making lifelong friends at a respected repertory theatre. At the end of the day, our main purpose is to make sure students and teachers alike have access to transformative artistic experiences, and we are grateful to be part of an organization that prioritizes and enables this purpose. In addition to our programs that directly benefit students and teachers, as a company we strive to connect with the larger community. The Community Engagement and Outreach program works closely with our education department, as we share the same goal of bringing theatre to as many people as possible—especially those who may not have access to it otherwise. We meet frequently to discuss various strategies for outreach and to brainstorm new ways to reach more people. The program’s goal is to share our valuable theatre resources more equitably among the communities of Pasadena and Los Angeles. Fulfilling this aim often involves discounts or subsidized tickets for partner organizations. This also means we are trying to make our work more accessible to patrons that cannot enjoy a spoken English performance. We are currently in the process of introducing ASL‐ and Spanish‐interpreted performances. The Community Outreach program is closely connected to the Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion initiative at A Noise Within, as we share the goal of sharing our resources more equitably. Right now, as part of this partnership, we are looking into training both our staff and our resident artists in Theatre of the Oppressed techniques, with the long‐term goal of inviting communities in to our theatre to create their own works. Now more than ever, exposure to the arts is vital to a person’s education and development. After all, as education scholar Maxine Greene once said, “The arts…cannot change the world, but they may change human beings who might change the world.”

2

D A L L A S T H E A T E R C E N T E R M O R G A N A W I L B O R N , D I R E C T O R O F E D U C A T I O N

L E A H H A R R I S , M A N A G E R O F P U B L I C W O R K S D A L L A S D A L L A S , T X

Dallas Theater Center’s (DTC) mission is to engage, entertain, and inspire our diverse community by creating experiences that stimulate new ways of thinking and living. Dallas Theater Center’s mission is truly the heart of who we are as an institution. We further our mission here at Dallas Theater Center by consistently producing plays, educational programs, and other initiatives that are of the highest quality and reach the broadest possible constituency. The Public Works Dallas and Education departments directly support DTC’s mission through their robust engagement and educational programming. However, both serve two very meaningfully different purposes within the organization.

A snapshot of PWD: Public Works Dallas creates ambitious works of participatory theatre through long term partnerships city wide. Engage: partnerships and collaborations are the bedrock of Public Works Dallas, fostering deep and sustained relationships with organizations and individuals who share our collective vision. Entertain: producing works of participatory theatre with members of our diverse community, work of the highest quality. Inspire: building community through theatre to revitalize civic life and stir our collective imaginations. Theatre at the heart of every community, community at the heart of every theatre.

Public Works Dallas is a year‐round community engagement program that deliberately blurs the line between professional artists and community members. Public Works Dallas offers customized theatre‐based workshops, led by professional artists including 4 members of DTC’s Diane and Hal Brierley Resident Acting Company, through 5 community partner organizations in 6 Dallas neighborhoods. These “Public Workshops” culminate in a free‐to‐the‐public musical adaptation of a William Shakespeare play at the Wyly Theatre, featuring 100 community members, local professional cameo groups, 5 professional actors, and civic leaders, in a 200‐person theatrical experience presented for Dallas, by Dallas. Dallas Theater Center launched Public Works Dallas with the hope of continuing to advance our mission, vision, and values to reach all parts of our city. A key component of the program is two‐way learning: learning that doesn’t just happen in the community but continues to pour itself right back into the institution and serves as a catalyst for new ways of thinking about how we function as a theatre. Additionally, the Public Works Dallas department oversees DTC’s annual partnership with the North Texas Food Bank, a collaboration that takes place during our production of A Christmas Carol to bring awareness to hunger in our North Texas community. Lastly, our Community Conversation series is a free‐to‐the‐public offering of conversations that lift the themes, ideas, and questions from the art we produce onstage. These conversations take place in the community, with the community, and offer a deeper insight into the conversations surrounding our art. The Education department commits itself to sustaining a culture of learning and enrichment by providing unique educational experiences for our diverse Dallas community. We execute this process by cultivating shared spaces for learning and enrichment through advanced theatrical training, professional development, thought‐provoking conversations, lectures, and workshops, as well as forming organizational partnerships within the Dallas‐Ft. Worth community. Programming that creates shared spaces for learning includes programs such as SummerStage, Learning Lab, and Project Discovery (PD). Project Discovery partners with 720 students and teachers throughout Dallas‐Ft. Worth. Students participate in 1‐hour pre‐show workshops, post‐show conversations, and are seated among the general audience at evening performances. Thus, creating moments of learning for students and teachers from their peers, guest theatre artists, and elder patrons alike. DTC’s Learning Lab at Booker T. Washington High School of the Performing and Visual Arts (BTWHSPVA) works with 20 high school senior theatre students. The Learning Lab is an advanced level acting course where students are given full access to the rehearsal process as well as to DTC actors and artists, providing them with learning opportunities beyond the classroom that support their professional college and career endeavors. Educational programs that support opportunities for audience enrichment include DTC’s Come Early and Stay Late programs. “Come Early” is a free 30‐minute lecture designed to enhance a patron’s play‐going experience. Cast members share details about the play’s origins and context, plus insights into the creative process behind the production. After each performance, audience members are invited to “Stay Late” to engage in a brief post‐show conversation with a member of the cast free of charge. Patrons engage and share insights about the play in a lively discussion. The Education department partners with one organization (university, museum, religious affiliate, or other local nonprofits) within the community whose programming corresponds with a particular play within our season. These unique partnerships allow DTC patrons to make connections between the art they see onstage and local community entities, programs, or issues. There is very little programmatic collaboration between the two departments. This is due to Public Works Dallas’s focus on engagement with its partner sites in the community and Education’s focus on enrichment with patrons when they come to the visit the theatre. Moments of cross‐collaboration include our keeping PD/Learning Lab/SummerStage students up to date with PWD volunteer opportunities

3

onstage and off, as well as encouraging our Project Discovery schools to contribute goods for DTC’s institutional partnership with the North Texas Food Bank each year during the run of A Christmas Carol. As both departments grow and work within the same communities, we are learning where we have opportunities to share resources and connections that we have built over time with local community members, organizations, and businesses. Public Works Dallas and Education have a deep understanding of their unique function and purpose as it relates to the institution’s mission, vision, and values. Their efforts move beyond mere “outreach” to local organizations and communities. Instead, both departments build authentic and long‐lasting relationships with the community. Over time, as we learn the needs and interests of our diverse community, we strive to create unique experiences rooted in ongoing engagement, learning, and enrichment both within the neighborhood community and at the theatre.

L O O K I N G G L A S S T H E A T R E C O M P A N Y

L I Z Z I E P E R K I N S , D I R E C T O R O F E D U C A T I O N A N D C O M M U N I T Y P R O G R A M S A N D R E W W H I T E , C O N N E C T I V I T Y A N D E N G A G E M E N T D I R E C T O R

C H I C A G O , I L Lookingglass’s mission statement, written 30 years ago at the company’s inception, declares our dedication to creating theatre that leaves artists and audiences “changed, charged, and empowered” and is “exhilarating, inspirational, and accessible to all.” This twin imperative— creating work that has transformative impact and is available to all—is at the root of both the company’s Department of Education and Community (“E & C”) and the more recently created Department of Connectivity and Engagement (“C & E”). We have always known that the company’s mission strongly influenced these two departments—but Lookingglass is now devoting time and attention to identifying how these two departments inform, impact, and reflect the organization as a whole, as well as taking time to better define the relationship between these two departments. The E&C department was established in 1993, a few years after the company’s founding (1988). Currently we primarily serve students preK‐12th grade. Major programs include:

school partnerships (18‐25 individually designed in‐school residencies and after‐school programs; approx. 2,000 students);

student matinees (4‐6 performances, with pre and post workshops, approx. 1,200 students);

summer camps (4 distinct programs for students K‐12th grade, over 10 weeks, approx. 250 students)

Young Ensemble (audition‐based school‐year program for 30 middle and high school students);

Workshops (2‐3 per year) The C & E department, created in 2015, gave an organizational home for community engagement programs. The department primarily serves participants 18 and older through:

Civic Practice Partnerships (4‐5 partnerships annually in which teaching artists partner with organizations to identify goals, needs, and challenges, then design and implement programming to address them);

Community Partner Subscriptions (partner organizations bring constituents to mainstage programming, and teaching artists visit constituent groups before and after production, all at no cost to orgs or constituents);

REFLECT panel discussions (5 panel discussions per production to explore thematic content);

City partnerships (3‐5 times/year participating in City of Chicago cultural events);

Ad hoc projects (additional community‐based projects). During recent conversations, we identified areas of overlap between the two departments:

Lookingglass’s core values: Invention, Transformation, and Collaboration are at the root of all our programs;

Philosophical approach: we listen intently to partner organizations, custom‐designing work based on the needs of our partner;

Teaching artists: an expansive roster of these professionals delivers techniques that serve both departments. Over the last 18 months, we received feedback that some of our key stakeholders (internal and external) didn’t fully understand the nature or value of these programs to our community. This prompted us to identify a few challenges and questions, including:

SPACE: Without sufficient physical space for our programs (currently our camps and classes take place off‐site in locations that aren’t ours, which requires additional human and monetary resources) how can we grow our programs in terms of numbers served and earned income?

4

COMMUNICATIONS: o Our marketing materials, including our website, only reflect E & C programs—how does anyone know what C & E is? o Without institutional language that specifically defines our work and impact, how can we write successful grant

proposals to support this work? o If our board members aren’t clear about our work, how can they advocate for it?

After these conversations, we homed in on our highest priority strategic questions:

1) Would Lookingglass be better served if E & C and C & E lived under one umbrella? 2) How do we best determine next steps for all of our programming ideas? 3) How do we balance the City of Chicago’s needs with our organizational priorities?

As of this writing, we know that these two departments will move under one umbrella within the next 6 months. Regarding the other questions, we are engaged in strategic conversations with our internal stakeholders—staff leadership, department heads, veteran teaching artists, board members, ensemble members, etc.—to determine how we can better communicate the nature, value, and needs of these two departments to our external stakeholders (audience, donors, broader community). Guided by our mission to make theatre that is “exhilarating, inspirational, and accessible to all,” we are energized as we look ahead to the future of education and community engagement at Lookingglass, and we’re excited to engage all our stakeholders as effective advocates for the benefit of all Lookingglass programming—within the walls of our theatre as well as throughout the city that is our home.

M C C A R T E R T H E A T R E C E N T E R

E R I C A N A G E L , D I R E C T O R O F C R E A T I V E D E V E L O P M E N T A N D S T R A T E G Y P R I N C E T O N , N J In 2013, McCarter’s artistic director, Emily Mann, decided that she wanted the educational programs of the theatre to more directly connect with the artistic programming and aesthetic values of the organization. At that time, I was serving as the artistic engagement manager, a newly created position that oversaw the curation of public programming and community partnerships directly connected to the mainstage theatre season. I reported to the producing director, and my collaboration with the education staff was limited to working as a dramaturg on a few projects and supporting the education director by facilitating strategic staff retreats for that department. When the producing director and education director left the theatre at the same time (both to start their own companies!), Emily asked me to move “up and over” to become the director of Education and Engagement. This would be a department‐head‐level position, reporting directly to her, and overseeing both the educational programs of the theatre and the audience engagement projects and programs. I would continue to be part of the artistic cabinet, consisting of me, the literary manager, a new associate artistic director, and a producing associate, participating in season planning, new play development, and general artistic support for the season. Although the education staff were a cohesive unit, technically they became part of the artistic staff. During the transition, we began to say that our artistic department had literary, producing, and education wings, which each overlapped and supported each other on specific projects and programs. Part of our thinking as we crafted this new structure was that any engagement event or program should in some way be educational: it should have specific goals and learning objectives, it should be designed much in the way you would design a curriculum, and it should be able to be thoughtfully assessed for impact. At the same time, we felt that any educational program offers a chance to engage with our community. The obvious engagement is with schools and community organizations, but we felt that it was imperative that we think of children and youth as young community members engaging with the artistic heart of McCarter, rather than as a customer base for classes, camps, or other programs. As part of setting a new vision for the department, I identified three main areas of focus for our work: to facilitate discovery, to develop agency, and to build community. These goals were meant to guide us as we created, shifted, and re‐imagined all our programs, regardless of age group, specific artistic content, or whether the budget codes read “education” or “engagement.” Some of the ways that these goals overlapped surprised us at first. For instance, the directive to build community not only affected our engagement efforts, but also shifted and strengthened our commitment to ensemble building as an artistic skill in all of our classes and camps. The idea of developing agency was surprisingly powerful in our adult programs and show‐based public discussions and classes where we found that many participants, despite their successful careers and multiple degrees, had never been in an educational setting where they were encouraged to trust their own meaning‐making around a piece of art. The notion of facilitating discovery helped us reframe audience events as platforms for personal epiphany rather than just as opportunities to share out the theatre’s take on a particular play. It also helped us rethink curricula and teaching artist training to ensure that we were truly living our value around student‐centered learning processes and ensuring that we treated our students as generative artists. Over the years, the staff has also worked together to identify common learning goals that could be assessed across every program, as well as a statement of core values to help guide our decision‐making, program design, and pedagogical process.

5

When I became the director of Education and Engagement, I restructured the existing education staff to best support the integrated work of the department. The director of high school programs became the artistic engagement manager. She has grown our engagement offerings significantly over the last five years and brings her deep and personal community relationships to bear in many cross‐departmental projects. The director of after school programs position became the curriculum and instruction manager, with oversight not only of after‐school classes, but also of curriculum design and pedagogy across all programs, including some that engage primarily with adults, such as our Christmas Carol Community Ensemble. Our education projects manager now oversees logistics of all school partnerships and, working in close partnership with McCarter’s production and stage operations staff, serves as a production manager for any education program that culminates in a performance supported by technical elements. Our education administrator continues to hold us all together with her Tessitura expertise, financial tracking, intern program coordination, and impeccable customer service. She also functions as the primary logistical support for our OnStage Seniors, an ensemble of non‐professional actors over the age of 55 that create and tour documentary plays in our community. A few years ago, as our programs grew, we added a part time School and Community partnerships coordinator, and next season that role will become a full‐time Education Associate, supporting both on and off‐site programming. One of the things I most appreciate about McCarter is the way in which the organizational leaders encourage growth among their employees, and do so based on the strengths, interests, and ambitions of each individual. The roles of each education staff member have developed over time as each person has become more and more confident and experienced in their roles. Education and engagement staff have embraced opportunities for heightened responsibility for a variety of projects and partnerships, which has allowed me to have a lighter touch on many education and engagement projects, and it has created more time for me to connect artistically with season planning, new play development, and institutional strategy, bringing youth‐oriented and community‐engaged perspective into even more of those conversations and projects. In the coming season, my title will change to director of creative development and strategy to better reflect a role that oversees education, engagement, and literary staff. The notion of creative development is meant to encompass the idea of play development and artist cultivation, but it is also directly borrowed from the terminology around Creative Youth Development, an educational practice very much in line with our existing departmental philosophy, which integrates creative skill‐building with critical life skills and approaches young people as active agents of their own change. The word “strategy” refers to the idea that education and engagement are not just isolated projects or programs within the theatre, but are essential to the growth, success, and mission of our institution. Over the past five years, McCarter’s education and engagement team has worked tirelessly to adjust our practices to be excellent collaborators with other departments, we’ve repaired long‐troubled relationships throughout the building that had brought about a vicious circle of isolation for the department, and we have dedicated ourselves to becoming a thriving embodiment of the organization’s articulated values, such as artistic excellence, diversity, community, and innovation. As I see it, the next adventure ahead lies in more actively using our skills of education and engagement to further weave the values we’ve articulated as a department—reciprocal partnership, access for all, personal growth, and intentional inclusion—into the fabric of the organization as a whole.

T H E O L D G L O B E F R E E D O M E B R A D L E Y ‐ B A L L E N T I N E , D I R E C T O R O F A R T S E N G A G E M E N T

S A N D I E G O , C A In 2017, the Globe adopted a statement of values, which has been socialized throughout the organization and guides every decision made by board, staff, artists, and volunteers: The Old Globe believes that theatre matters. Our commitment is to make it matter to more people. The values that shape this commitment are transformation, inclusion, excellence, stability, and impact. These values have transformed the organization from one that is theatre‐centric to one that embraces its public service role: As a 501(c)3, not‐for‐profit institution, The Old Globe dedicates itself to serving the public good through theatre. The institution provides public value through the work it does in its three theatres and through the Arts Engagement work it does in our region and neighborhoods. Included in this work is Globe for All (GFA), an initiative that began in 2014 when The Globe launched a tour to bring professional theatre to multigenerational audiences at neighborhood centers, libraries, homeless shelters, military installations, and correctional facilities. This program was the catalyst for a re‐envisioning of The Globe’s traditional education department and transformed it into a Department of Arts Engagement. Arts Engagement, formed in 2015 to serve the public good by making theatre matter to more people, is now at the core of the institution. Traditional theatre education programs have been reimagined: The Globe continues to reach nearly 5,000 students and teachers a year through free student matinees of mainstage productions; these same children experience visits to their schools by The Globe’s talented staff of teaching artists who have developed new methodologies that encourage the students through participatory activities. Our School in the Park program works with approximately 750 4th‐ 7th graders annually on a weeklong project. The Globe’s Arts Engagement programs have expanded, and thousands of theatregoers have the opportunity to make connections between their lives, our wider culture, and

6

theatre. Broad segments of the San Diego community have been invited to make art and engage in discussions about the stories we tell on our stages and their own lives. But the cornerstone of Arts Engagement remains the relationships The Globe has built with communities. Since the advent of GFA, 7500 people have enjoyed The Globe’s productions in their own communities, and The Globe has forged deep, ongoing partnerships with two dozen community‐based organizations and government agencies in neighborhoods throughout the region. Through these partnerships, The Globe also provides a multifaceted array of participatory arts engagement programs that have strengthened connections between economically and culturally diverse communities and The Globe, making art more accessible. Expanded Arts Engagement programs allow The Globe to share its artistic resources with a broader constituency of San Diegans—and in 2017 alone, these programs served over 37,000 people. The Globe has become a leader in the field of social justice. After listening sessions with our partners in corrections, we created Reflecting Shakespeare, a program that utilizes theatre‐based activities, self‐reflection, and journaling through the study and performance of Shakespeare. In March of 2018 we hosted the third Shakespeare in Prisons Conference, which brought together more than 180 people from seven different countries to discuss restorative‐justice practices that employ art as a means to reach people on the margins of society. The lifelong learning opportunities and participatory art‐making projects that The Globe provides through its Department of Arts Engagement is part of our commitment to make theatre in service to the public good.

P A L M B E A C H D R A M A W O R K S G A R Y C A D W A L L A D E R , D I R E C T O R O F E D U C A T I O N A N D C O M M U N I T Y E N G A G E M E N T

W E S T P A L M B E A C H , F L As the director of education and community engagement at Palm Beach Dramaworks, I am often asked to define the nuances of my title. While education and community engagement are intrinsically connected and intersect in definition, both education and community engagement programming dovetail with one another and with other departments within our organization. We currently define our education programming as comprehensive professional training for K‐12 or higher education students. These programs include skills‐building classes, workshops, and master classes currently in acting, directing, and playwriting. We also brand our free mainstage school‐day performances as education programming as 90% of our field trip audiences are high school drama students, and the experiences are used as tools to reach benchmarks. At the moment our education programming is outside our building, with the exception of school‐day performances. Our education department was created two years ago, and we are quickly developing and defining our programming. Currently, we concentrate on giving rigorous instruction to drama students interested in pursuing a career in this field. Our programming is focused on classical acting skills, directing, college audition skills, and playwriting. This programming is offered only in school classrooms, and we work primarily with three high schools and one middle school. The Young Playwrights program, open to all Palm Beach County high school students, begins as a contest. From this contest, 10 students are chosen annually to develop 10‐minute plays and receive professional development support for another year. Our community engagement programming is more complex, and we define it as using drama for either engaging the community by examining social issues or building awareness for our brand (“Theatre to Think About”). Community engagement programming is designed for all ages, and it is presented at our theatre and in locations around the community. Our community engagement programming consists of free professional development training for teachers, a free school touring program on social issues, an applied theatre program for ESL immigrant high school students, an intergenerational digital storytelling project for LGBTQ youth, and our Dramawise program for adults. Our professional development programming comprises arts integration‐based training for K‐5 teachers, and it focuses on using reader’s theatre across the curriculum. Our touring program, offered to the full 6th grade student body, uses the topic of conflict between police officers and communities as a tool for teaching empathy. This program is currently expanding with the development of a 7th grade play about human trafficking and internet safety. Our ESL program at Glades Central High School, located in one of the poorest communities in the state, began by using drama as a tool to stimulate English literacy. This program is expanding to include devised theatre to gather young immigrant stories. Our digital storytelling project builds bridges between LGBTQ youth and elders at a local community center. It not only teaches understanding and compassion, but also gathers elders’ stories before they are lost forever. Our Dramawise program, a collaboration with PBD’s development department, promotes audience enrichment in a series of classes. In these classes, a group of adults read scripts for each mainstage production, analyze it with our education staff, and, after a meal, meet the show’s production team and actors to learn how PBD interpreted the play. This program now includes a book club to further deepen the learning. The development department takes care of logistics, while the instruction is handled by education staff.

7

Eventually, as our programming expands, we plan to include separate staff in education and community engagement, with both areas reporting to the education director. While we will expand community engagement to promote drama as a tool for social awareness, we will continue to work with the development department to help promote audience development by providing enrichment experiences for our patrons.

S I L K R O A D R I S I N G

T R A C Y S T R I M P L E , E D U C A T I O N C O O R D I N A T O R C H I C A G O , I L

Silk Road Rising is becoming a premier cultural destination in Chicago. We are not just a theatre company, but instead an organization that explores stories through education programs, community events, video plays, essays, theatre productions, and more. Lately, we have turned our focus to improving our education programs and community engagement offerings. With a small staff, much of the work involved in organizing and implementing of our education and community engagement is shared by the entire staff. The education programs mainly consist of Empathic Playwriting Intensive Course (EPIC) and EPIC Spark, our two in school residency program for 6th ‐12th graders. We are also looking to expand EPIC into colleges, and possibly retirement homes, and the education department is developing adult education courses in the corporate high rise building and our office residence. The majority of the planning and implementation of the aforementioned education programs falls on the education coordinator. However, these programs could not be implemented without support and fundraising efforts from Silk Road Rising’s grant writer, executive director, and the rest of our modest staff. Silk Road Rising is expanding community engagement programming. We already have a robust offering of video plays available on our website, which will soon be accompanied by glossaries, dramaturgy packets, and curriculum designed by the education coordinator. The main idea of a video play is to give the community unlimited access to the script to help understand what can be learned from it. Additionally, Creative Conversations, 60‐ to 90‐minute presentations centered around one of Silk Road Rising’s video plays, is offered to colleges, religious institutions, community centers, and more. Currently, the chief programming officer leads Creative Conversations while the executive director works with institutions to book the programs. Community engagement can also be found at post‐production talkbacks, mostly led by the associate producer and/or chief programming officer. In the future, Silk Road Rising will engage Chicago’s West Ridge community in an investigative theatre project in collaboration with the residents as well as hosting cultural events for the community, highlighting food and traditions from Silk Road cultures. All in all, Silk Road Rising does most education and community engagement collaboratively. We think of community engagement as a form of education, and our education programs as a way of engaging the youth of the community. Silk Road Rising’s core values of discovery, empathy, and pluralism make education and community engagement a central part of our programming.

8

F I N D I N G S F R OM T C G E DU C A T I O N S U R V E Y 2 0 1 6

A N D T C G F I S C A L S U R V E Y 2 0 1 6 The Special Report on Education 2016 is Theatre Communications Group’s (TCG) 18th annual report on education programming by participating Member Theatres. This report examines personnel, programming, and age group and school level demographics of education departments, as reported in TCG Education Survey 2016. In addition, this report includes data from TCG Fiscal Survey 2016 relating to education program income and expenses. In both surveys, theatres reported on activity taking place within their fiscal year completed anytime between October 31, 2015 and September 30, 2016. Though some theatres completed both, the two surveys represent significantly different pools of responding theatres. The first section of the report focuses solely on Education Survey data, while the second section presents education‐related Fiscal Survey data. This Special Report on Education is intended to serve the field and to highlight the important education work taking place at TCG Member Theatres.

TCG EDUCATION SURVEY 2016 96 theatres participated in TCG Education Survey 2016. Throughout this report, we present data for six budget groups, based on total annual expenses.

TCG EDUCATION SURVEY 2016 PARTICIPANTS BY BUDGET GROUP (96 Theatres)

Budget Group Budget Group Expense Range # of Theatres Average Expenses

6 $10 million or more 33 $21,553,519

5 $5 million–$9,999,999 15 $7,239,870

4 $3 million–$4,999,999 8 $3,443,567

3 $1 million–$2,999,999 26 $2,007,086

2 $500,000–$999,999 7 $771,507

1 $499,999 or less 7 $224,574

This year, we also looked at a subset of 42 theatres that have participated in the TCG Education Survey each year from 2012 to 2016 to identify changes that have taken place over the last five years. Findings for these Trend Theatres are presented throughout the report in the form of 5‐Year Snapshots. The average expenses for all 96 participants in TCG Education Survey 2016 were $9,443,433, while the average expenses for the subset of 42 Trend Theatres were $13,058,710 in 2016. In addition to the analysis presented within this report, TCG provides an online reporting tool which allows any user to run customized reports based on TCG Education Survey data. This online tool provides an opportunity to create reports based on criteria including location, types of programming, number of personnel, and participant demographics, in addition to budget size, and can be found on the TCG website at www.tcg.org/ResearchAndResources/ArtsEducation/EducationSurvey.aspx. The average, minimum, and maximum figures presented in the tables throughout this report were calculated based on the number of reporting theatres for each given question—i.e., the number of theatres for which the question was applicable—unless otherwise noted. For example, results regarding the average number of full‐time education personnel employed by participating Member Theatres (shown on the next page) were calculated based on the data of only those theatres that reported employing full‐time education personnel. All the figures presented in the 5‐Year Snapshots, on the other hand, reflect the collective activity of all 42 Trend Theatres throughout the 5‐year period.

9

EDUCATION PERSONNEL INFORMATION In this section, we present information about education personnel reported by the 96 TCG Education Survey 2016 participants. In aggregate, these theatres reported 4,208 education‐related personnel: 321 full‐time education staff, 102 part‐time education staff, 2,212 teaching artists, 450 interns, 174 apprentices, and 949 volunteers. The table that follows displays the percentage of theatres in each budget group that reported employing or engaging each of these types of education personnel. We note that not all theatres that conduct education programming have dedicated education staff.

PERCENTAGE OF THEATRES REPORTING EDUCATION PERSONNEL

All Group 6 Group 5 Group 4 Group 3 Group 2 Group 1

# of Respondents (96) (33) (15) (8) (26) (7) (7)

Full‐Time Staff 90% 100% 100% 100% 88% 71% 29%

Part‐Time Staff 54% 61% 60% 50% 42% 86% 29%

Teaching Artists 95% 97% 93% 88% 92% 100% 100%

Interns 68% 91% 87% 75% 46% 29% 29%

Apprentices 28% 45% 20% 25% 12% 14% 43%

Volunteers 51% 67% 40% 63% 38% 29% 57%

86 of the 96 theatres that participated in TCG Education Survey 2016 (90%) reported full‐time education staff. Of those 86 theatres, 24% had only 1 full‐time staff member (not shown in table).

All Group 4, 5, and 6 theatres reported full‐time education staff, while all Group 1 and 2 theatres reported employing teaching artists.

Groups 3, 4, 5, and 6 had higher percentages of theatres report full‐time staff than part‐time staff, Group 2 had higher percentages of theatres report part‐time staff, and Group 1 was evenly split between percentages of theatres reporting full‐time and part‐time staff.

Except for Groups 1 and 2, the percentages for which are the same, as budget group increases, so too does the percentage of theatres reporting that they hosted interns.

Groups 1 and 6 had the highest percentage of theatres report that they engage education apprentices, and approximately two‐thirds of Group 4 and 6 theatres reported engaging education volunteers.

NUMBER OF EDUCATION PERSONNEL


Number of Theatres (96) (33) (15) (8) (26) (7) (7)

Full‐Time Staff

# reporting (86) (33) (15) (8) (23) (5) (2)

Average 3.7 6.0 2.3 2.4 2.0 3.0 5.0

Min–Max 1–19 2–19 1–5 1–4 1–6 1–9 1–9

Part‐Time Staff

# reporting (52) (20) (9) (4) (11) (6) (2)

Average 2.0 2.5 1.2 1.5 1.9 1.8 2.0

Min–Max 1–10 1–10 1–2 1–3 1–7 1–3 1–3

Teaching Artists

# reporting (91) (32) (14) (7) (24) (7) (7)

Average 24.3 38.3 22.2 22.1 17.8 9.1 4.4

Min–Max 1–275 3–275 2–80 6–43 1–64 3–33 1–10

Interns

# reporting (65) (30) (13) (6) (12) (2) (2)

Average 6.9 8.0 8.5 2.2 6.2 2.5 3.0

Min–Max 1–71 1–71 1–29 1–6 1–25 2–3 2–4

Apprentices

# reporting (27) (15) (3) (2) (3) (1) (3)

Average 6.4 5.9 5.7 8.5 6.7 25.0 2.3

Min–Max 1–55 1–55 1–8 5–12 1–15 25–25 1–4

Volunteers

# reporting (49) (22) (6) (5) (10) (2) (4)

Average 19.4 26.0 29.5 6.4 13.9 2.0 6.5

Min–Max 1–290 1–290 2–148 1–18 2–45 2–2 1–12 10

EDUCATION PROGRAMMING The following section presents information about the types of education programming offered by the 96 TCG Education Survey 2016 participants.

The two most common programs reported were internships and workshops/classes at schools, both of which were offered by more than 90% of theatres.

The most widely offered type of access programs were programs for economically disadvantaged individuals (offered by 73% of theatres), followed by mobility‐related programs (52% of theatres), language‐related and “other” programs (both 38%), Autism‐related programs (30%), and cognitive‐related programs (24%).

18% of theatres offered bilingual educational programming.

76% of theatres reported that they offered teen classes, 61% offered adult classes, and 58% offered children’s classes.

59% of theatres offered professional development for classroom teachers, and 24% offered in‐service credit to teachers. 54% of theatres offered professional development for teaching artists.

Fewer than 5% of theatres offered distance learning programs via social media, webinar, or “other” means; service learning partnerships; or “other programs.”

5‐YEAR SNAPSHOT: EDUCATION PERSONNEL For the 42 Trend Theatres, the average number of full‐time education staff increased annually from 2012 to 2016, representing a 30% increase over the 5‐year span. The average number of part‐time education staff increased noticeably in 2013, declined over each of the following two years, and rebounded slightly in 2016. The average number of teaching artists fluctuated between 2012 and 2015 but increased by 21% in 2016 relative to the previous year. The average number of education volunteers decreased annually over the 5‐year period, representing a 21% decrease over time. The average number of interns decreased slightly in 2016 after its high point the previous year.

AVERAGE NUMBER OF EDUCATION STAFF

AVERAGE NUMBER OF TEACHING ARTISTS, VOLUNTEERS, AND INTERNS

3.07

3.48 3.763.88 4.00

0.88 1.23 1.15 0.98 1.050

1

2

3

4

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Full‐time Part‐time

24.325.0

23.6 24.1 29.2

11.4 10.3 9.8 9.1 9.0

3.9 4.4 4.2 6.1 5.80

5

10

15

20

25

30

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Teaching Artists Volunteers Interns

11

93%

91%

88%

86%

85%

82%

81%

79%

77%

76%

74%

73%

73%

63%

61%

59%

58%

54%

54%

52%

51%

48%

47%

45%

44%

40%

40%

38%

38%

31%

30%

27%

24%

24%

24%

23%

20%

19%

18%

18%

16%

9%

6%

5%

4%

4%

2%

1%

Internships

Workshops/Classes at School

Workshops/Classes at Theatre

Student Assessment Tools

Student Matinees

Program Evaluation Tools

Discussions

Residency/In‐School Programs

Partnerships

Teen Classes

Summer Programs/Camps

Access Program: Economically Disadvantaged

Student Study Guides

Program Guides

Adult Classes

Professional Development: Classroom Teachers

Children's Classes

Workshop/Classes at Community Center

Professional Development: Teaching Artists

Access Program: Mobility

Teacher Guides

Long‐Range Planning Process

College/University Partnerships

Career Day/Job Shadowing

Adult Programs

Professional Development: Theatre Education Staff

Literacy Programs

Access Program: Language

Access Program: Other

Conservatory/Professional Training Programs

Access Program: Autism

Touring Shows: Middle School

Professional Development: In‐Service Credit for Teachers

Access Program: Cognitive

Job Training

Touring Shows: Elementary School

Touring Shows: High School

Touring Shows: Community

Video Guides

Bilingual Programming

Workshops/Classes at Other Locations

Distance Learning: Video

Student Reviewer/Critic Program

Service Learning Partnerships

Distance Learning: Social Media

Other Programs

Distance Learning: Webinar

Distance Learning: Other

PERCENTAGE OF THEATRES REPORTING VARIOUS TYPES OF EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND PRACTICES

12

5‐YEAR SNAPSHOT: EDUCATION PROGRAMMING TYPES The following charts reflect data related to the ten most offered types of education programs, as reported by the 42 Trend Theatres in TCG Education Survey 2016. We then track those ten most offered programs throughout the 5‐year period for the 42 Trend Theatres. The percentage of theatres that reported offering the top ten types of programs and practices was higher in 2016 than in 2012 in all categories except for workshops held at the theatre—the percentage for which ended the 5‐year span at its initial level after annual fluctuations—and evaluation tools and residencies in schools, which both saw 2% decreases over time. The increase in the percentage of theatres offering teen classes was the most substantial over the 5‐year period, followed by the percentage of theatres utilizing assessment tools and those offering student matinees and partnerships. The figures below represent the percentages of those theatres that reported having each type of program in each year.

PERCENTAGE OF TREND THEATRES REPORTING EDUCATION PROGRAM TYPE – TOP FIVE PROGRAMS

PERCENTAGE OF TREND THEATRES REPORTING EDUCATION PROGRAM TYPE – NEXT FIVE PROGRAMS

86%

88%

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%

100%

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Workshop atSchools

Assessment Tools

Internships

Student Matinees

Workshop atTheatre

70%

74%

78%

82%

86%

90%

94%

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Evaluation Tools

Residency inSchools

Partnerships

Economic AccessPrograms

Teen Classes

13

AGE GROUPS SERVED BY EDUCATION PROGRAMS

AVERAGE % OF AGE GROUPS SERVED BY 96 PARTICIPATING MEMBER THEATRES Participating theatres were asked to report the breakdown of programming serving each age group as follows: ages 0–4, ages 5–11, ages 12–18, ages 19–25, ages 26–40, ages 41–60, and ages over 60. For the 96 theatres that participated in TCG Education Survey 2016, the largest percentage of their programming (44%) was directed at children ages 12–18. Indeed, on average, theatres from all budget groups directed the largest percentage of their programming (between 40% and 50%) at this age range—except for Budget Group 1 theatres, for which the largest percentage of programming (43%) focused on the 5–11 age range. Excepting Group 1 theatres, the 5–11 age range was the second most popular recipient. Considering all 96 theatres, this age range received an average of 27% of programming, with budget group‐specific percentages ranging from 18–34% (not including Group 1).

PERCENTAGE OF AGE GROUPS SERVED BROKEN DOWN BY GROUP

Ages 0–42%

Ages 5–1127%

Ages 12–1844%

Ages 19–259%

Ages 26–406%

Ages 41–606%

Ages over 606%

All Budget Groups

Ages 0–44%

Ages 5–1143%

Ages 12–1826%

Ages 19–253%

Ages 26–408%

Ages 41–6011%

Ages over 605%

Group 1

Ages 0–41%

Ages 5–1127%

Ages 12–1850%

Ages 19–257%

Ages 26–407%

Ages 41–604%

Ages over 604%

Group 2

Ages 0–43%

Ages 5–1129%

Ages 12–1843%

Ages 19–259%

Ages 26–404%

Ages 41–605%

Ages over 607%

Group 3

Ages 0–41%

Ages 5–1134%

Ages 12–1840%

Ages 19–2516%

Ages 26–403%

Ages 41–603%

Ages over 603%

Group 4

Ages 0–43%

Ages 5–1131%

Ages 12–1841%

Ages 19–258%

Ages 26–405%

Ages 41–606%

Ages over 606%

Group 5

Ages 0–42%

Ages 5–1118%

Ages 12–1848%

Ages 19–259%

Ages 26–408%

Ages 41–609%

Ages over 606%

Group 6

14

STUDENTS AND TOTAL PARTICIPANTS SERVED All 96 theatres reported serving students, defined as kindergarten through graduate level. The aggregate number of students served by all participating theatres was 2,271,607. On average, Group 4 theatres served the greatest number of students, though that group’s average was greatly affected by the high number of students served by two theatres for young audiences.

TOTAL NUMBER OF STUDENTS SERVED (K–GRADUATE LEVEL)

All Groups Group 6 Group 5 Group 4 Group 3 Group 2 Group 1

# of Respondents (96) (33) (15) (8) (26) (7) (7)

Average 23,663 28,281 18,610 43,719 25,510 3,786 2,809

Min–Max 10–190,000 2,166–121,514 1,553–55,900 300–190,000 33–148,689 295–9,392 10–16,669

ALL PARTICIPANTS SERVED BY EDUCATION PROGRAMS


# of Respondents (96) (33) (15) (8) (26) (7) (7)

Average 28,304 36,655 24,853 45,256 27,761 4,257 3,021

Min–Max 15–200,000 2,675–140,841 2,687–65,000 300–200,000 500–155,000 295–10,958 15–16,669

5‐YEAR SNAPSHOT: STUDENTS SERVED AVERAGE STUDENTS (K–GRADUATE) SERVED BY TREND THEATRES The average number of students, kindergarten through graduate level, served by the 42 Trend Theatres’ education programs increased by 10% between 2015 and 2016. It’s important to note that the question from which these data come was moved to a different section of the survey in 2014, and an additional new companion question asked about the total number of people served by education programs. These changes may account for differences between the averages in the first two years presented here and the most recent three.

21,404

25,274

21,766

27,893

30,713

20,000

22,000

24,000

26,000

28,000

30,000

32,000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Average Number of K–Graduate Students Served

15

STUDENT MATINEE TICKET PRICES In this section, we look at student matinee attendance and ticket prices. Group 3 had the highest average number of students who attended student matinees. Group 5 had the highest average number of additional student‐priced tickets sold through the box office, while 67% of participating theatres with student matinee programs reported offering free student matinee tickets to students and their schools (not shown in tables). 85% of theatres reported offering a student matinee program; these theatres offered an average of 35 matinee performances for the reporting period and, in aggregate, served 843,409 students (not shown in tables). It is important to note that the student matinee data include the work of Theatres for Young Audiences (TYAs); while TYAs are asked to report on only those matinees that are envisioned as educational explicitly rather than on all matinee programming offered, the number of student matinee performances and attendees is nonetheless much higher than is typical for non‐TYAs. If we were to exclude TYAs from our measurement, the average number of student matinee performances would be 19, while the median (the middle value) would be 8.

TOTAL NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO ATTENDED STUDENT MATINEES


# of Respondents (82) (33) (15) (8) (19) (4) (3)

Average 10,285 11,153 11,398 9,538 11,510 1,638 595

Min–Max 29–75,888 500–58,627 593–44,617 280–39,513 29–75,888 200–5,158 150–1,286

TOTAL NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL STUDENT‐PRICED TICKETS SOLD THROUGH BOX OFFICE


# of Respondents (67) (25) (10) (4) (21) (4) (3)

Average 5,010 6,467 7,081 2,094 4,048 2,320 185

Min–Max 2–52,968 175–52,968 1,084–25,796 619–5,157 49–41,257 180–8,213 2–403

STUDENT MATINEE TICKET PRICES (EXCLUDING FREE TICKETS)


# of Respondents (73) (28) (15) (7) (18) (4) (1)

Average $12.09 $12.89 $12.78 $12.36 $10.39 $12.00 $8.00

Min–Max $4.00–$30.00 $4.00–$30.00 $5.00–$19.00 $8.00–$19.00 $6.00–$18.00 $8.00–$15.00 $8.00–$8.00

5‐YEAR SNAPSHOT: STUDENT MATINEE PRICING

AVERAGE TREND THEATRE STUDENT MATINEE TICKET PRICES This chart shows the change in average student matinee ticket price offered over the 5‐year period, as reported by the 42 Trend Theatres.

$11.01

$10.47

$11.25

$10.97

$11.37

$10.00

$10.50

$11.00

$11.50

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Average Student Matinee Ticket Price

16

EDUCATION FUNDING This section looks at ways in which education programming is funded. The chart below presents the percentage of education programming that was paid for by grants or the theatre versus the percentage of programming that was paid for by schools or participants.

HOW EDUCATION PROGRAMMING IS SUPPORTED

As shown in the chart below, 36% of the 96 theatres reported that they allocated funding received from the National Endowment for the Arts for education‐related work. Note that we do not collect data on whether theatres applied for NEA funding.

PERCENTAGE OF THEATRES ALLOCATING NEA FUNDING TO EDUCATION‐RELATED WORK

Another potential source of funding is the U.S. Department of Education, which supports arts education programming through its competitive Model Development and Dissemination Program. Of the 96 participants, 5 theatres reported receiving this funding—1 theatre in Group 2, 2 theatres in Group 3, 1 theatre in Group 4, and 1 theatre in Group 6. Survey participants were also asked if they have an education endowment. Nineteen of the 96 theatres reported having an endowment relating specifically to their education activity: 3 theatres in Group 3, 2 theatres in Group 4, 5 theatres in Group 5, and 9 theatres in Group 6. No education‐related endowments were reported by Group 1 or Group 2 theatres. More information about funding for education programs can be found in the next section of the report, which presents education‐related data from TCG Fiscal Survey 2016.

49%

80%

63%

54%

55%

64%

62%

51%

20%

37%

47%

45%

36%

38%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Group 4

Group 5

Group 6

All

Paid by grants and/or theatre Paid by schools and/or participants

36%

42%

53%

25%

31%

43%

0%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%


17

To complement the findings from TCG Education Survey 2016, we now present education‐related data from TCG Fiscal Survey 2016. First conducted in the mid‐1970s, the annual TCG Fiscal Survey captures comprehensive data from TCG Member Theatres related to their finances, attendance, and ticket sales. The information gathered in this survey serves as the basis for Theatre Facts, TCG’s in‐depth annual report on the state of the U.S. professional not‐for‐profit theatre field. Theatre Facts presents data through three lenses: A general overview of the estimated universe of professional not‐for‐profit theatres in the U.S.; a longitudinal analysis of the TCG Member Theatres that participated in each of the last five surveys; and a detailed examination of all of the participants in the current survey, with data broken down by budget group. Participants in the TCG Fiscal Survey also gain exclusive access to extensive online reporting tools and data. To read Theatre Facts 2016, visit www.tcg.org/ResearchAndResources/TheatreFacts.aspx. For more information about the TCG Fiscal Survey, visit www.tcg.org/ResearchAndResources/FiscalSurvey.aspx. Throughout the report that follows, we present education‐related data for the 182 TCG Member Theatres that participated in TCG Fiscal Survey 2016, broken into six budget groups, based on annual expenses.

In aggregate, theatres offered 1,267 education and outreach programs that served 2.9 million people around the country. Education activity generated $62.3 million in total income. Of the 182 theatres that participated in TCG Fiscal Survey 2016, 160 (88%) reported education/outreach programs activity. On average, those theatres offered 8 types of programs that served 18,344 people.

RANGE (min–max) All Group 6 Group 5 Group 4 Group 3 Group 2 Group 1

# reporting (160) (36) (33) (20) (49) (17) (5)

# Programs (types) 1–53 1–53 1–34 2–11 1–16 1–12 1–4

# Served 10–252,043 215–138,613 243–67,111 140–252,043 25–136,722 10–13,000 10–2,844

TCG FISCAL SURVEY 2016: EDUCATION SNAPSHOT

TCG FISCAL SURVEY 2016 PARTICIPANTS (198 Theatres)

Budget Group Budget Group Expense Range # of Theatres Average Expenses

6 $10 million or more 37 $20,770,985

5 $5 million–$9,999,999 34 $7,054,189

4 $3 million–$4,999,999 21 $4,054,468

3 $1 million–$2,999,999 58 $1,940,402

2 $500,000–$999,999 20 $783,600

1 $499,999 or less 12 $300,527

OVERVIEW OF EDUCATION/OUTREACH PROGRAMS

18

Of the 182 TCG Fiscal Survey 2016 participants, 142 (78%) reported earned income from education/outreach programs. In aggregate, education/outreach programs generated $42.1 million in earned income. We note that “earned income” represents contract and fee income related to classes, workshops, and other education/outreach programming; it does not include ticket income from student matinees or performances specifically geared towards young audiences, which is captured as part of other line items in the survey. Total earned income from education/outreach programs reflects income from three categories of programs: Arts‐In‐Education/Youth Services Programs, Adult Access/Outreach Programs, and Training Programs. Of the 142 theatres:

19 theatres (13%) reported income from all three categories of programs

50 theatres (35%) reported income solely from Arts‐In‐Education/Youth Services Programs

40 theatres (28%) reported income from Arts‐In‐Education/Youth Services Programs and Training Programs

20 theatres (14%) reported income solely from Training Programs

8 theatres (6%) reported income from Arts‐In‐Education/Youth Services Programs and Adult Access/Outreach Programs

3 theatres (2%) reported income from Adult Access/Outreach Programs and Training Programs

2 theatres (1%) reported income solely from Adult Access/Outreach Programs

In the table below, we present the average income earned from education/outreach programs, the percentage of that income that came from each of the three categories of programs, and the average earned income from education/outreach programs as a percentage of those theatres’ total earned income. Figures were calculated based only on those theatres that reported earned income from education/outreach programs. The 142 theatres generated an average of $296,717 in earned income from their education/outreach programs, which represented 7.3% of those theatres’ total earned income.

EARNED INCOME FROM EDUCATION/OUTREACH PROGRAMS



# reporting (142) (31) (32) (16) (44) (15) (4)

Min $1,050 $2,150 $13,350 $2,035 $1,600 $1,050 $9,420

Max $4,425,372 $4,425,372 $2,540,288 $1,108,178 $638,105 $85,596 $71,781

Average Earned Income $296,717 $747,952 $315,632 $197,674 $119,239 $20,450 $32,779

% from Arts‐In‐ Education/Youth Services Programs

38.6% 39.1% 22.8% 67.6% 45.8% 75.2% 90.4%

% from Adult Access Programs 2.2% 2.9% 1.4% 0.4% 1.7% 3.8% 9.6%

% from Training Programs 59.2% 58.0% 75.9% 32.0% 52.4% 21.1% 0.0%

EARNED INCOME FROM EDUCATION/OUTREACH PROGRAMS AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL EARNED INCOME

Average 7.3% 6.2% 8.6% 9.5% 12.1% 5.3% 29.5%

Min 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.1% 0.3% 0.2% 10.8% Max 89.3% 66.9% 89.3% 36.3% 71.4% 33.9% 67.6%

Of the 182 TCG Fiscal Survey 2016 participants, 111 (61%) reported that some portion of their unrestricted contributed income supported education programs. In aggregate, those theatres reported $20.2 million in education‐related contributions. We note that unrestricted contributed income includes unrestricted donations/grants for operating and non‐operating purposes as well as net assets released from temporary restrictions—i.e., assets that were released into the unrestricted fund during the fiscal year by the satisfaction of time or purpose restrictions. Contributed income that was awarded/donated to theatres in the fiscal year being surveyed that was restricted for use until a future fiscal year is not reflected in these figures.

Not all theatres receive support from every type of funder/contributor. In the table that follows, we show the number of theatres that reported unrestricted contributed income from each source and, to the right of that number, what percentage of those theatres indicated that some of that funding supported education programs. For example, of the 182 participants, 101 received unrestricted contributed income from the federal government, and 21% of those 101 theatres reported that a portion of that money supported education programs.

EARNED INCOME FROM EDUCATION/OUTREACH PROGRAMS

UNRESTRICTED CONTRIBUTED INCOME RELATED TO EDUCATION/OUTREACH PROGRAMS

19

# OF THEATRES REPORTING UNRESTRICTED CONTRIBUTED INCOME FROM EACH SOURCE AND THE PERCENTAGE OF THOSE THEATRES THAT REPORTED A PORTION AS SUPPORTING EDUCATION PROGRAMS



Federal 101 21% 33 27% 22 18% 11 9% 27 26% 5 0% 3 0%

State 143 29% 28 39% 27 30% 14 29% 50 26% 15 33% 9 0%

City/County 131 22% 29 28% 25 16% 16 19% 44 25% 11 27% 6 0%

Corporations 173 45% 37 68% 33 61% 19 53% 55 33% 19 26% 10 0%

Foundations 182 49% 37 65% 34 74% 21 38% 58 41% 20 40% 12 0%

Trustees and Other Individuals

181 35% 37 57% 34 47% 21 33% 58 28% 20 20% 11 0%

For the 111 theatres that reported some amount of unrestricted contributed income as supporting education programs, the average amount was $181,893, which represented 4.8% of their total unrestricted contributed income. In the two tables that follow, we present the average amount of unrestricted contributed income that supported education programs reported by the theatres, in dollar amounts and as a percentage of the total unrestricted contributed income that they reported. All figures were calculated based only on those theatres that reported unrestricted contributed income that supported education programs. For example, 21 of the 182 TCG Fiscal Survey 2016 participants reported unrestricted contributed income from the federal government that supported education programs. For those 21 theatres, the average amount that supported education programs was $53,244, which represented 67.1% of the total unrestricted contributed income that those theatres reported from the federal government.

UNRESTRICTED CONTRIBUTED INCOME THAT SUPPORTED EDUCATION PROGRAMS



Federal Government

# reporting (21) (9) (4) (1) (7) (0) (0)

Average $53,244 $76,796 $56,527 $48,852 $21,714 — —

Min $7,000 $10,000 $12,500 $48,852 $7,000 — — Max $498,269 $498,269 $163,609 $48,852 $50,000 — —

State Government

# reporting (41) (11) (8) (4) (13) (5) (0)

Average $25,180 $19,529 $33,330 $38,063 $28,130 $6,597 —

Min $375 $3,825 $6,753 $1,920 $608 $375 — Max $139,539 $42,100 $139,539 $116,000 $81,600 $17,000 —

City/County Government

# reporting (29) (8) (4) (3) (11) (3) (0)

Average $25,390 $45,116 $13,768 $9,000 $21,392 $19,333 —

Min $650 $650 $4,350 $2,500 $1,400 $2,000 — Max $147,000 $147,000 $34,000 $17,500 $88,892 $52,000 —

Corporations

# reporting (78) (25) (20) (10) (18) (5) (0)

Average $67,089 $137,990 $56,133 $24,510 $21,336 $6,280 —

Min $100 $10,000 $5,000 $100 $750 $150 — Max $392,500 $392,500 $194,617 $120,000 $141,947 $25,000 —

Foundations

# reporting (89) (24) (25) (8) (24) (8) (0)

Average $94,402 $171,772 $91,659 $53,956 $50,131 $44,119 —

Min $97 $10,000 $500 $15,000 $97 $4,950 — Max $784,750 $400,000 $784,750 $100,000 $220,000 $239,000 —


# reporting (64) (21) (16) (7) (16) (4) (0)

Average $57,275 $109,029 $45,074 $55,970 $15,590 $3,389 —

Min $500 $710 $1,387 $7,754 $565 $500 — Max $372,097 $372,097 $228,497 $155,897 $59,750 $7,031 —

Total Unrestricted Contributed Income that Supported

Education Programs

# reporting (111) (26) (27) (11) (36) (11) (0)

Average $181,893 $428,031 $173,450 $117,876 $71,934 $44,717 —

Min $500 $115,850 $14,000 $51,754 $705 $500 — Max $1,074,097 $1,024,319 $1,074,097 $275,897 $283,051 $333,000 —

20

PORTION THAT SUPPORTED EDUCATION PROGRAMS AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL UNRESTRICTED CONTRIBUTED INCOME FROM THE SOURCE



Federal Government

# reporting (21) (9) (4) (1) (7) (0) (0)

Average 67.1% 64.9% 59.3% 100.0% 89.0% — —

Min 14.6% 14.6% 35.7% 100.0% 31.1% — — Max 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% — —

State Government

# reporting (41) (11) (8) (4) (13) (5) (0)

Average 37.7% 22.9% 35.8% 67.7% 52.4% 24.8% —

Min 3.9% 4.5% 19.3% 9.4% 3.9% 7.3% — Max 100.0% 100.0% 45.4% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% —

City/County Government

# reporting (29) (8) (4) (3) (11) (3) (0)

Average 19.9% 17.5% 18.8% 8.2% 26.5% 44.1% —

Min 0.9% 0.9% 2.8% 5.5% 7.3% 3.5% — Max 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 86.7% —

Corporations

# reporting (78) (25) (20) (10) (18) (5) (0)

Average 17.8% 17.1% 19.4% 22.8% 17.6% 35.7% —

Min 0.7% 1.9% 4.4% 0.8% 0.9% 0.7% — Max 100.0% 73.6% 88.6% 52.4% 100.0% 80.6% —

Foundations

# reporting (89) (24) (25) (8) (24) (8) (0)

Average 10.3% 8.7% 10.1% 10.2% 21.9% 25.3% —

Min 0.1% 0.7% 0.1% 3.4% 0.1% 2.8% — Max 100.0% 27.5% 90.1% 49.8% 100.0% 91.1% —


# reporting (64) (21) (16) (7) (16) (4) (0)

Average 2.3% 2.0% 2.5% 6.6% 4.2% 2.3% —

Min 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 1.1% 0.1% 0.6% — Max 38.2% 16.3% 23.7% 9.8% 38.2% 4.5% —

Total Education‐Related Contributions as a % of Total Unrestricted Contributed Income

# reporting (111) (26) (27) (11) (36) (11) (0)

Average 4.8% 4.5% 4.4% 5.7% 6.9% 10.4% —

Min 0.1% 0.6% 0.4% 1.7% 0.1% 0.2% — Max 68.4% 16.6% 43.5% 16.7% 21.1% 68.4% —

In total, 152 of the 182 TCG Fiscal Survey 2016 participants (83%) reported some kind of education‐related income. The table below presents the average amounts that theatres reported in combined earned and unrestricted contributed income as dollar amounts and as a percentage of their total unrestricted income. Again, all figures were calculated based only on those theatres that reported income related to education programs. It is important to note that many theatres conduct additional education programming for which they do not receive income.

TOTAL INCOME RELATED TO EDUCATION PROGRAMS (EARNED AND CONTRIBUTED)



# reporting (151) (34) (33) (18) (46) (16) (4)

Average $412,742 $1,009,274 $447,981 $247,746 $170,351 $49,195 $32,779

Min $1,550 $2,150 $21,173 $3,450 $3,600 $1,550 $9,420 Max $4,260,482 $4,620,482 $2,540,288 $1,108,178 $704,565 $418,596 $71,781

TOTAL EDUCATION INCOME AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL UNRESTRICTED INCOME (EARNED AND CONTRIBUTED)

Average 5.4% 4.8% 6.0% 6.1% 8.2% 5.8% 13.2%

Min 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.1% 0.3% 0.2% 5.4% Max 56.6% 47.8% 48.2% 25.9% 35.6% 56.6% 17.3%

TOTAL EDUCATION INCOME

21

Of the 182 TCG Fiscal Survey 2016 participants, 158 (87%) reported education‐related expenses. In aggregate, those theatres spent $51.6 million, 69% of which went towards salaries and benefits for education staff. It is important to note that some theatres that conduct education programs do not have designated education staff members, and that education activities often involve personnel beyond education staff, including other staff members, actors, and additional guest artists.

In the table that follows, we present the average amounts that theatres spent on education payroll, education fringe benefits, and education non‐payroll expenses, which could include non‐salaried education personnel as well as supplies and materials. All figures were calculated based only on those theatres that reported education‐related expenses.

EDUCATION EXPENSES



Education Payroll

# reporting (135) (34) (33) (18) (42) (6) (2)

Average $222,892 $515,139 199,810 $106,284 $92,409 $23,902 $22,132

Min $526 $81,000 $15,977 $17,308 $14,660 $526 $12,000 Max $1,912,473 $1,912,473 $811,892 $218,274 $447,880 $61,700 $32,264

Education Fringe Benefits

# reporting (133) (34) (33) (18) (41) (5) (2)

Average $42,998 $107,461 $33,586 $20,037 $13,934 $3,860 $2,750

Min $51 $14,000 $1,581 $2,106 $551 $51 $1,434 Max $338,621 $338,621 $162,234 $39,914 $49,478 $8,867 $4,066

Education Non‐Payroll

# reporting (156) (34) (33) (19) (48) (16) (6)

Average $101,285 $260,728 $117,885 $39,136 $41,827 $13,482 $13,079

Min $148 $37,000 $12,824 $2,056 $750 $148 $250 Max $1,368,306 $1,368,306 $879,340 $92,385 $244,435 $38,332 $22,658

Total Education‐Related Expenses

# reporting (158) (34) (33) (19) (50) (16) (6)

Average $326,643 $883,327 $351,281 $158,808 $129,203 $23,651 $21,373

Min $250 $132,000 $46,773 $12,980 $750 $958 $250 Max $2,762,087 $2,762,087 $1,600,343 $274,635 $509,920 $76,067 $58,988

Finally, we present the average ratio of education expenses for education payroll and benefits versus education non‐payroll expenses. Please note that non‐payroll expenses include payments to education‐related personnel who were engaged as independent contractors. Figures were calculated based on the total number of theatres that reported education expenses of some kind.

RATIO OF EXPENSES RELATED TO PAYROLL & BENEFITS VS. NON‐PAYROLL EDUCATION EXPENSES



# reporting (158) (34) (33) (19) (50) (16) (6)

Education Payroll and Benefits

Average 69.4% 70.5% 66.4% 75.4% 68.9% 43.0% 38.8%

Education Non‐Payroll Expenses

Average 30.6% 29.5% 33.6% 24.6% 31.1% 57.0% 61.2%

Please visit the Arts Education section of the TCG website at www.tcg.org/ResearchAndResources/ArtsEducation.aspx for more information about TCG’s education‐related programming.

For more information about the state of the U.S. professional not‐for‐profit theatre field in 2016, read Theatre Facts 2016, available on the TCG website at www.tcg.org/ResearchAndResources/TheatreFacts.aspx.

To read articles from the October 2018 “Engagement and Education” issue of American Theatre magazine, visit the AT website at www.americantheatre.org. Copyright © October, 2018—Theatre Communications Group

TOTAL EDUCATION EXPENSES

field reflections on education and community …tcg.org/pdfs/education/specialrepedu2016.pdfto top...

Documents