close
 

It is one thing to read about planning in an ideal universe, and quite another to find yourself in the trenches actually dealing with planning issues that never appeared in any written text or toolkit. The case studies that follow show how five states in very different environments—geographic, cultural, political, economic and social—have tackled the challenge of planning and devised their own solutions. All of them counsel creating methods germane to your unique situation. Even so, there is much to be learned from each of them and we hope you will find their stories full of useful ideas, some of which you may want to adapt to your agency.

Case Studies at a Glance


Arizona

Colorado

Maine

Mississippi

New Jersey
 FY2000 Appropriation   $3.7 million   $1.9 million   $1.2 million   $2.2 million   $19.5 million






 SAA Staff Size   19   8   9   12   22






 Total State Population   4.7 million   3.9 million   1.2 million   2.8 million   8.1 million






 State Population Density (per square mile)   41   38   40   58   1,087






 Timeframe of Plan   FY2001-FY2006   FY1996-FY2000   FY1996-FY2001   FY1998-FY2002   FY1997-No end date






 Principal Planning Leaders   Executive director and programs administrator
  Executive director   Executive director and assistant director   Executive director and strategic planning committee of the commission   Executive director and deputy director with council chairs, planning committee chairs, and secretary of state






 Number of Months to Create the Plan   18 (projected)   18   8   18   32






 Budget   $5,000 + travel   $50,000   $58,000 ($20,000 cash and remainder in staff time/ mailings, etc.)   $15,000   $53,000 in SAA funds was part of a total $320,000 (from various sources) used for statewide plan






 Public Input Tactics   Public forums, arts forums, one-on-one interviews, direct mail, Web site, e-mail, fax   Statewide arts conference and 35 arts town meetings throughout the state   Open commission meetings, task forces, implementation committees, direct mail, phone calls, public meetings, Web site   Town meetings, workshops, focus groups, business roundtables, surveys, one-on-one interviews, attendance at other peer meetings   Governor's Conference on the Arts, focus groups, roundtable discussions, mail surveys, public hearings






 Use of Consultants   Not used   Helped to create evaluation mechanisms   Guided the process, meeting facilitation, plan review   Facilitated planning, working with board and staff, design of survey instrument, data collating   Designed planning process, conference kick-off, focus groups, design of survey, early drafts of the plan






 Biggest Successes   The last plan laid the foundation for the creation of an arts endowment. The new plan makes the case for state appropriations in very concrete terms.   The agency is more integrated with respect to programming, its relationships with constituents, internal budgets, and in its arts in education efforts.   Improved working relationship between commission and staff. Two major initiatives, representing a 145% increase in agency appropriations, were funded.   Made the agency more efficient and productive, empowered the staff, led to legislative increases, launched initiatives that positioned the agency as a leader in the state.   Galvanized public support and advocacy for the arts, which led to three consecutive years of increased legislative appropriations.






 How Did They Do It?   Case Study   Case Study   Case Study   Case Study   Case Study

NASAA's mission is to strengthen state arts agencies.
DonateNow
About NASAA | About State Arts Agencies | Member Benefits | Contact NASAA
National Assembly of State Arts Agencies
1029 Vermont Avenue, NW, 2nd Floor | Washington, DC 20005
202-347-6352 | fax: 202-737-0526 | TDD: 202-347-5948 | nasaa@nasaa-arts.org
Terms of Use © National Assembly of State Arts Agencies

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.