Navigating Change in Arts Funding Equity

People exploring an immersive digital art exhibit with blue and colorful light projections.

In recent years, the arts sector has made a sustained and vocal push for equity in funding. The arts community has called on foundations to move away from disproportionately funding large, well-established institutions in favor of supporting smaller, community-rooted organizations—particularly those led by and serving historically marginalized groups.

That change is starting to happen. In a thoughtful and provocative piece, Sarah Wilbur unpacks this very shift, noting how foundations like Mellon, Ford, and Doris Duke – stalwart arts funders for decades – are actively rethinking their giving strategies. They’re distributing resources more broadly and, in many cases, moving away from the long-term, multi-year funding relationships that once provided stability to major organizations.

This is, in many ways, exactly what we asked for. And yet, as Wilbur points out, some in the field—especially those affiliated with institutions that have historically received the lion’s share of funding—are now voicing concern, frustration, and even alarm. Unless foundations drastically increase the total pool of funds they’re distributing (something that isn’t guaranteed), supporting more organizations usually means each one gets a smaller piece of the pie.

For those artists, leaders, and staff who’ve long worked in or with comparatively well-resourced institutions, this shift can feel destabilizing. It can feel like loss. And yet, for decades, many of us have acknowledged that the status quo was unsustainable—that it favored the few over the many. And we know that the arts are an ecosystem; professional organizations, community arts, and arts education all fit together to provide the societal benefit we know the arts offers.

So here we are. Change is happening. And it’s worth pausing to ask: Are we prepared to sit with the consequences of the change we’ve advocated for?

This isn’t a call for anyone to stop pushing for equity. Quite the opposite. It’s a call to deepen our understanding of what that push requires—from us, and from the institutions we belong to. It’s a reminder that equity isn’t just about expanding access; it’s also about redistributing power and resources. That’s hard work. It’s emotionally complex. But it’s also necessary.

Wilbur’s piece invites us to face this moment with clarity and honesty. So let’s do just that—not with defensiveness, but with the kind of critical self-reflection our field urgently needs.

Image by note thanun on Unsplash


Discover more from Hannah Grannemann

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

3 thoughts on “Navigating Change in Arts Funding Equity

  1. […] yesterday’s post, I asked readers to reflect on the ripple effects of the equity we say we want in arts funding. More […]

    Like

  2. […] grants; they involved shifting policies to ensure more inclusive funding—just like the changes Wilbur described in her earlier piece about major foundations. I expanded on that in response to Roman Sanchez’s essay about the good […]

    Like

  3. […] government funding becomes less predictable and institutional giving shifts with cultural and economic tides, nonprofits are under growing pressure to secure individual gifts. In this climate, a […]

    Like

Leave a reply to The Ripple Effects of Equity in Arts Funding – Hannah Grannemann Cancel reply