EVALUATION
TECHNOLOGIES
INCORPORATED
AN EVALUATION REPORT
FOR THE
SERVICES TO THE ARTS CATEGORY
OF THE
INTER-ARTS PROGRAM
Submitted to:
Inter-Arts Program
National Endowment for the Arts
Submitted by:
Evaluation Technologies Incorporated
2020 North 14th Street, Sixth Floor
Arlington, Virginia 22201
(703) 525-5818
May 30, 1986
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
I. INTRODUCTION
This report is the result of a test of the evaluation design developed by
Evaluation Technologies Incorporated (ETII for the Inter-Arts Program under a
previous contract with the National Endowment for the Arts (The Inter-Arts
Program Services to the Arts Category: A Goal-Based Evaluation Design; July
27, 1984).
The purpose of this evaluation report is fourfold: (1) to document the test
of the evaluation design; (2) to document the data base that was developed
during the data collection phase of the evaluation process; (3) to present
descriptive and analytical findings ; and (4) to provide recommendations to the
Inter-Arts Program regarding refinements of the evaluation design and of
grantee reporting requirements.
»
Presented in brief below is an overview of the methodology used, the data
analyzed, and the overall conclusions resulting from an evaluation conducted
for the Services to the Arts Category of the Inter-Arts Program.
II. METHODOLOGY
The evaluation design was the result of a collective and cooperative effort by
ETI and Inter-Arts staff. It derives much of its structure from the existing
grant reporting requirements and information provided by Endowment personnel.
The implementation of the evaluation design was divided into three distinct
phases: data collection and preparation, data analysis, and summary of
results.
The data used for this report represent a synthesis of the data contained in
the Services to the Arts Category grant files, covering the last four fiscal
years. Particular variables concerning management issues, budgets and the
overall effect of Endowment funding, among others, were examined first by a
document review, and subsequently through telephone interviews with the
grantees themselves. All of this information was initially collected on a
written record and then transformed into computer files, both for future use
by the Program, and more immediate use as the data base for the statistical
analyses.
Data analysis consisted predominantly of basic descriptive statistics (such as
frequencies, percentages, and frequency distributions) and was augmented by
qualitative information drawn from both the grant files and the telephone
interviews.
The last phase of the evaluation consisted of combining the input from these
varied data sources with the statistical analyses into a format useful to the
Endowment as a whole, and the Inter-Arts Program in particular, on a number of
different levels. First, this study demonstrates the appropriateness of eval-
uation for the Programs at the Endowment, and secondly establishes a data base
to which information from subsequent years can be added, and on which further
studies/reports could be based.
<
III. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The grantees for the Services to the Arts Category are extremely diverse.
While they all provide some type of service to artists or art groups, there is
extensive variation among all of the different types and scopes of service.
For purposes of evaluation, grantees were grouped by the primary service
objective for which they were awarded funding by the Inter-Arts Program:
(1) Management Assistance
(2) Business Development
(3) Volunteer Development
(4) Financial Support
(5) Information Dissemination.
The principal findings in each of these groups are presented below.
1. Management Assistance
This group comprises three principal activities: Technical Assistance, Work-
shop Assistance, and Scholarship Assistance. Technical Assistance grantees
usually have larger project budgets than the other two, reflecting the broader
scope of their services. Scholarship Assistance is provided by somewhat older
organizations, usually to encourage attendance at workshops they also hold.
Many of the projects show a strong correspondence between cuts in Endowment
funding and reductions in their project budgets.
2. Business Development
These grantees tend to have the largest project budgets of all the other gran-
tees in this Category; they are also adept at increasing their project funding
despite reductions in Endowment grant monies.
3. Volunteer Development
This type of service is a function of larger project budgets which have fairly
stable funding over time. The majority of these grantees recruit technical
specialists from private industry and then place them among client arts
groups, usually after giving the volunteers training in relating their skills
to an arts population and environment.
4. Financial Support
These grantees are either part of very large organizations or else very small
ones. Their principal fund-raising efforts are focused on public and private
contributions, rather than earned incomes (for themselves and other benefic-
iary organizations) .
5. Information Dissemination
Most of these projects are operations of smaller organizations. These distri-
bute information through a combination of mailing and meeting strategies.
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2012 with funding from
Boston Library Consortium Member Libraries
http://archive.org/details/evaluationreportOOnati
6. General Characteristics
In general, all of these objectives are addressed by projects with budgets
representing less than half of the grantee organization's budget. There is a
definite tendency for projects to be allocated diminishing amounts--by both
the grantee organization and the Endowment--over the course of time. This is
probably related to the relatively high start-up costs for any new project.
Of particular interest is the differentiation in the levels of funding for
repeat and one-time grantees. Repeat grantees are consistently funded at
higher levels for first year studied than grantees funded only once over the
four-year period studied. Parallel to this is the pattern for the Endowment
funding to represent a higher percentage of the project budget for these
one-time grantees than for repeat ones.
IV. UTILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The information collected is a condensation of all of the information provided
to this Category over the last four fiscal years by its grantees. Because
this was collected and analyzed by people outside of the Endowment, a more un-
biased appraisal of the operation of these projects was possible.
Category specialists can now use this collection as the basic data base, which
can be updated during each future grant cycle. This provides a means to
quickly extract relevant information (such as for a Panel review or to brief
the person conducting a site visit), to conduct additional research on partic-
ular topics, and to greatly extend the availability and accessibility of the
grant information. This type of access can serve to improve the Endowment's
institutional memory.
Many of the recommendations based on this evaluation pertain to the diverse
data collection methods and instruments currently employed by the Program.
Most of these need to be revised to sharpen their focus on particular points
of reference, and to increase the pre- and post-grant comparability of infor-
mation. Timing of the reports could be changed to compensate for the differ-
ent fiscal years used by the Endowment and most of the grantees. Specific
requirements for the Final Descriptive Report might be established so that
this report could serve as a guide to actual project accomplishment. In
essence, the comparability of the pre- and post-grant data could be greatly
enhanced through judicious additions and deletions to the instruments already
in use throughout the project cycle.
This evaluation provides the Endowment with the capacity to use this infor-
mation and the attendant analyses to conduct their own reviews, to monitor
project implementation and to provide additional information for Panel reviews
and other queries.
The complete evaluation report contains detailed information on the processes
and results of the research effort, including case studies, detailed presenta-
tions of findings and recommendations, as well as the complete data base of
grantee records. These records are also available on floppy disks for Program
use.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Evaluation Design 1-1
B. Data Sources 1-7
C. Data Coll ection Procedures 1-10
D. Data Analysis Procedures 1-12
E. Evaluation Report Format 1-13
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE GRANTEES
A. Introduction II-l
B. Grantee Characteristics II-2
C. Summary 11-10
III. ANALYSIS OF THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE OBJECTIVE
A. Introduction III-l
B. Grantee Characteristics 1 1 1-3
C. Summary ...' 111-14
IV. ANALYSIS OF THE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE
A. Introduction IV-1
B. Grantee Characteristics IV-1
C. Summary IV-7
V. ANALYSIS OF THE VOLUNTEER DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE
A. Introduction V-l
B. Grantee Characteristics V-2
C. Summary V-9
VI. ANALYSIS OF THE FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE
A. Introduction VI- 1
B. Grantee Characteristics VI-1
C. Summary VI-6
VII. ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION DISSEMINATION OBJECTIVE
A. Introduction VII-1
B. Grantee Characteristics VII-1
C. Sunmary VI I- 11
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Overview V1II-1
Observations from the Population VIII-1
Population Characteristics and Distributions VIII-3
Information Utility VII 1-5
Recommendations VIII-6
Evaluation Process VI 1 1-9
Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations
Geographic Location of Grantee Organizations
Data Bases for the Services to the Arts Category
n
LIST OF EXHIBITS
PAGE
Exhib"
it 1.
Exhib
it 2.
Exhib i
it 3.
Exhib
it 4.
Exhibi
it 5.
Exhib
it 6.
Exhibi
t 7.
Exhib"
it 8.
Exhibi
t 9.
Exhib"
it 10.
Exhibi
t 11.
Exhib"
it 12.
Exhibi
t 13.
Exhibi
t 14.
Exhib"
it 15.
Exhibi
t 16.
Exhib"
it 17.
Exhibi
t 18.
Exhib"
it 19.
Exhibi
t 20.
Exhib"
it 21.
Exhibi
t 22.
Exhib
it 23.
Exhibi
it 24.
Exhib
it 25.
Exhib'
it 26.
Exhib
it 27.
Exhib"
it 28.
Exhib
it 29.
Exhib-
it 30.
Exhib
it 31.
Goals Statement Matrix (Abridged) 1-4
Distribution of Grantees by Objective 1-6
Information Requirements 1-6
Grantee Location by Target Area I 1-4
Years in Service by Years in Existence 1 1-5
Organizational Budget by Years in Service II- 6
Percentage Project Budget by Years in Service 1 1 - 7
Organizational Budget by Percentage Project Budget I 1-8
Project Budget by NEA Funded Percentage 1 1-9
Grantee Distribution by Project Type and Years Funded ... III-2
Personnel Data III-3
Organizational Budget Distribution (Pre-Grant) II 1-4
Percentage of Organizational Budget Represented by the
Project and the Range of that Percentage 1 1 1 - 5
Distribution of Project Budgets II 1-6
Average Years in Service and Range II 1-6
Project Budgets by Years in Service III-7
Grantee Location II 1-8
Frequency Distribution of Types of Products 1 1 1-9
Subject Areas II I- 11
Average First-Year Grants 1 1 1-13
Distribution of Project Budgets IV-2
Project Budget by Age of Organization IV-3
Types of Products IV-4
Service Directed Toward People and Organizations IV- 5
Endowment Funding IV-6
Organizational Budget ... •. V-2
Grantee Location by Target Area V-4
Types of Volunteers by Sources of Volunteers V-5
Sources of Volunteers by Recruitment Strategy V-5
Types of Volunteers by Recruitment Strategy V-5
Actions to Institutional ize Vol unteers V-6
in
Exhibi
t 32.
Exhib"
it 33.
Exhibi
t 34.
Exhib"
it 35.
Exhibi
t 36.
Exhib"
it 37.
Exhibi
t 38.
Exhib"
it 39.
Exhibi
t 40.
Exhib"
it 41.
Exhibi
t 42.
Exhib"
it 43.
Exhibi
t 44.
Exhib"
it 45.
Exhibi
t 46.
LIST OF EXHIBITS (Concluded)
PAGE
NEA Percentages and Dollar Contributions V-6
Project Types VI - 2
Organizational Budget VI-3
Target Area by Grantee Location VI-4
NEA Funding VI-6
Grantee Distribution and Years of Funding VII-2
Organizational Budget Distribution VI 1-3
Distribution of Project Budgets VII-4
Years in Service by Project Budget for Clearinghouses ... VI 1-5
Grantee Location by Target Area VI 1-6
Target Populations VI 1-7
Nature of Information VII-8
Dissemination Strategies*..... VI 1-9
Percentage of Total Project Budget Funded by NEA VI I- 10
Funding Patterns VII-11
IV
I. INTRODUCTION
A. EVALUATION DESIGN
This report is tiie result of a test of the evaluation design developea by
Evaluation Technologies Incorporated (ETI) for the Inter-Arts Program under a
previous contract with the National Endowment for tiie Arts (The Inter-Arts
Program Services to the Arts Category: A Goal -Based Evaluation Design;
July 27, 1984).
The purpose of this evaluation report is fourfold: (1) to document the test
of the evaluation design; (2) to document the data base that was developed
during the data collection phase of the evaluation process; (3) to present
descriptive and analytical findings; and (4) to provide recommendations to the
Inter-Arts Program regarding refinements of the evaluation design and of
grantee reporting requirements. ♦
This evaluation study was designed to address tine specific evaluation questions
identified by the Inter-Arts Program, that is:
To what extent are the projects/activities which have been funded under
the Services to the Arts Category meeting Category goals?
1 . Program Purpose
The Inter-Arts Program seeks to nurture and sustain the work of artists and
arts organizations whose activities cross, mix, or involve two or more arts
disciplines. The Inter-Arts Program thus supports a wide range of undertakings
including those which:
o Create interdisciplinary work that will advance excellence or
potential excellence on a national or regional level;
o Implement projects or support the operations of institutions whicn
maintain the highest artistic level, have regional or national
significance and cross traditional discipline lines;
1-1
o Present inter- or cross-disciplinary art to tne public;
o Aavance the field of inter-disciplinary art; and
o Provide services and resources necessary for artistic growth and
devel opment.
The Inter-Arts Program staff expressed a need to focus on the last of these
types of support -- the Services to the Arts Category.
2. Category Purpose
Services to the Arts is an umbrella heading under which 'service' can De
variously defined, but is basically one which supports those organizations
serving mul ti disci pi inary professional artists and arts organizations. More
specifically, Category goals are designed to assist service organizations
which: , •
o Develop management skills for adninistrators ana directors of arts
organizations;
o Provide business practices/services which cut costs or increase
the quality of programs for arts groups;
o Develop new sources of volunteer support for the arts;
o Develop financial support for the arts; and/or
o Disseminate information about the arts to artists/arts administra-
tors/other arts constituencies.
Thus, Services to the Arts would not refer to the presentation of inter- or
cross-disciplinary art, but rather the provision of management or business
assistance to a group which did present such art. In particular, this type of
assistance encompasses activities which have regional or national signifi-
cance, and which are effective in providing artists and arts organizations
with the resources necessary for their institutional development.
1-2
3. Design Process
The development of the evaluation plan was preceded by: (1) discussions witn
Inter-Arts Program staff, (2) review of the literature, and (3) the interim
development of a goals matrix. The five Category goals were used as the guide
in the development of the matrix and of the overall evaluation design. Each
goal was treated as a separate objective, and it was assumed that this would
permit the analysis of grantees by objective and also by specific evaluation
questions. The matrix (Exhibit 1) sets forth the specific Services to the
Arts Category goals in the context of the more general National Endowment for
the Arts and Inter-Arts Program goals. It also displays the type of
information (such as performance indicators) necessary to an understanding of
whether each goal is met, separating each of these indicators into constituent
data elements to be used in measuring objective achievement. This matrix was
then presented to the Inter-Arts Program staff for their review and comment,
was revised in light of their suggestions, and serves as the framework upon
which the plan was constructed.
4. Scope of Design
As the evaluation study is designed simply to address the extent to which the
various activities funded are meeting Category goals, it does not address
itself to particular policy questions. In this way, relative issues of
prioritizing grant awards or determining the effect of Endowment funding are
not addressed. Rather, the evaluation is intended to examine projects funded
to date under each Category goal and to provide the framework for drawing
general conclusions about the grantees. It was intended that the implementa-
tion of this plan would result in two principal products: the detailed
analysis of individual grantees' success in meeting Category goals and an
analysis of the extent to which grantees as a group have been successful in
meeting Category goals.
The first assessment would allow judgnents to be made about particular
grantees; the second analysis would allow generalizations to be made about tne
relationship between various aspects of the grant process and the achievement
of each Category goal , and this may assist the Endowment in making future
program, policy, and funding decisions.
1-3
%t tb a.
■*-> "c ^D
— • o >
Of **
•■ --
ft* > o
c ~ c
a* w —
•~ c ■» >
^t. <=> a.
•v c — a.
•*- O — C
— o — - a.
£ ft "o —
.a o o — E
u-» to a. iaj ^
•• ■*- o — c
o — — S
* — .o J=»
w a. o —
=3 o • o- ^
M o 6
-*- o a, -•
o ■ —
W 3 ■»
■o — o J"
=> — c —
•» © -*-
— — e
*- a. — —
•- o o ~ a> m = _ c w — • o — o. ^ ^ _ — ■
*• ._/ k- — ^ ^ o a* a* ■» ^ >-> •» >- o — -r -•
K i_n u. i— < :zs x Lrt ac cti, •— x (_n Z •— J^ t-n •— ar
»_r> u. ,_/■)
— - O O.
O LTi O
i_j j-' a.
fc C a>
« ^ ^
o >— —
a. — —
g ->
—■ o
IT
>
_
§
^
CT
*»
^
Oj
M
a.
a>
If
c
• g
8 §•
T3
X3
SI 0.
o. .c
g £
N-
ce
U1
■*-
UJ
-t
1—1
CD
U=
I>
t-o
BE
u— ■
<I
t^J
U
c ^ —
m t. «■
« o •-.
— <- ^
•> o- h_
> — O
a- e
■—> j- c
— «r
> Of IT
»/» -^
** k l/t
f o
— a.
fty
.•>
Ml
4-J
K
-r
Cs
C 3
«•
M **
■
■■
k.
i/»
E
■»
s
l/t »»
s
*r
c
MJ
4->
1/1 w
M»
T
t/» c
«■ -b
T>
*/•
E
4->
e
t/>
o —
O
^ «^
»—
*»
o
O
l/t l/l
§ £
i g
& i
•5 £
g z ss
g s
o. a.
8 =
g &.
e. j-
5
m
M
«^
k
e
*
w
>
o
E
m
a
-o
•o
•*
"O
9
*f*
e
»
O
^
a-
Qy
*•
o
■
<=
w
a*
w
Q.
c
-o
IT
a.
a<
b
C
"»
*r
-C
■
c
^
g
a.
w
a.
CT-
e
O
>>
w
w
JC
<s>
k
O
-»
B
a-
a.
«»
-*
a
>
T3
c
Ml
c
i^
a-
u
•«
a-
-T3
LT
KJ
l/t
g
<—>
a.
O-
a-
o
T3
>
C
^J
O
■o
V*
-•
tft
w
c
tr
a.
*
o.
"»
■■
a.
^
^r
■O
g
^*
k
Ml
O
c
■
o
**
k
B
A.
^
e
-•
a.
^
cr
T=l
Oj
»/«
W
•«
*o
a.
W
o
T3
tfl
i—i
a.
a.
>
a-
ci
tf
O
-•
-C
■
3
t/t
u^
IT
k
ir
■^
4
*r
O
o
g
o
w.
O
w
o
•—
o.
►—
•*
u
^
■
*^
— S —
M «■ O ^T —
u O
& %
*B O k
•*-■*- O M
1-4
The population studied consisted of 58 organizations funded by the Endowment
over tne course of fiscal years 1980-1964. These grantees were awarded varying
amounts for varying purposes over that period: the five primary reasons for
funding are presented as this study's five objectives. These objectives are:
technical assistance, Dusiness devel opment, volunteer support, financial
support and information dissemination. In addition, many of these organiza-
tions were funded more than one time, so tnat, for the 58 grantees, there were
137 grants examined in all, unevenly distributed over the five objectives.
This is presented in Exhibit 2.
In the course of implementing this design it became apparent that certain
performance indicators would be difficult to obtain. To offset tnis lac< of
information, certain proxy measures and alternative strategies were developed.
These were based on discussions with the Inter-Arts Program staff after the
first perusal of the grant files and determination of the relative priority
and usefulness of the original evaluation questions. Of additional concern
was the relative scarcity of comparable post-grant information. The proxy
measure agreed upon in this case was,' for repeat grantees only, the use of
pre-grant information for the following grant year as post-grant information
for the one preceding. In essence, this created an interlocking system whereby
materials used in support of the FY 82 application could be treated as evidence
of the accomplishments of the FY 81 grant.
5. Assumptions
Particular assumptions were made at the onset of tne design process, pertain-
ing both to the design itself and the information collection procedures neeoed
to implement the evaluation design. It was assumed that the grantees were
treated as responsive to the relevant Category goal, rather than strictly as
providers of certain services.
In addition, it was assumed tnat the information collection procedures woul a
be lengthy but fairly straightforward, and would draw heavily from existing
written sources. It was anticipated that all 58 of the grantee organizations,
most of whom had received more than one grant, would have complete files at
Inter-Arts. Information collection would be primarily document review and
1-5
OBJECTIVE A
OBJECTIVE B
OBJECTIVE C
OBJECTIVE D
OBJECTIVE E
Assn. of College,
University and
Community Arts
Administrators
Assn. for Resources
& Technical Svcs.
California Confedera-
tion of the Arts
Chicano Humanities
6 Arts Council
Chinese American Arts
Council
Coronunity Art Resources
Bay Area Lawyers
for the Arts
Cul tural Council
Foundation
Film in the Cities
(82 - 83)
Performing Art Ser-
vices ( 81 - 82)
Arts 4 Business Council Artists Foundation
Cornish Institute
Penjerdel Foundation/
BVA Philadelphia
Volunteer Lawyers for
the Arts
Volunteer Urban Con-
sul ting Group
Arts for Everyone
NYC Dept. of Cultural
Affairs
Cultural Education
Collaborative
Film in the Cities (84)
42nd St Theatre Row
American Council for trie
Arts
Arts International
ATLATL
Artspace Projects
Center for Arts Informa-
tion
Center for Occupational
Hazards
Cultural All iance of
Greater Washington
Golden Gate University
Museums Collaborative
New York Foundation for
the Arts
Foundation for the Com-
munity of Artists
Hospital Auoiences
Graduate School for
Conrnunity Development
Greater Philadelphia
Cultural Alliance
Hal eakal a/The Kitchen
Playwrights Horizon
Twin Cities Metro. Arts
All iance
Institute of Alaska
Native Arts
Japanese American Cult.
A Conrnunity Center
Metropolitan/Regional
Arts Council
Mass. Cultural Alliance
New Performance Gallery
Opportunity Resources
for the Arts
Performing Art Services
(84)
Natl . Assn. of Artists
Organizations
Natl. Council on the
Aging
Natl. Guild of Community
School s of the Arts
New York Public Library
St. Paul - Ramsey United
Arts Fund
Sangamon State University
Southern Arts Fdn. .
Western States Art Fdn.
Publ ishing Center for
Cultural Resources
I
Exhibit 2: Distribution of Grantees by Objectives
s
s
1-6
only supplemented on an 'as needed' basis by the Category Specialist or througn
telephone interviews. It was assumed that these interviews would be conducted
by that Specialist, as the grantees would be more likely to respond to requests
for further information from the person who reviewed their applications (most
especially, as an incentive, those pending) than from an outsider.
It was also assumed that grantees within Category objectives would be compar-
able, for example, that grants awarded for information oissemination would be
relatively similar in scope and activities.
Finally, it was assumed that pre- and post-grant information would be avail-
able and of equal quality, so that an analysis between planned and actual
performance could be made.
B. DATA SOURCES
The information contained in the grant files served as the primary source for
this evaluation report. The Inter-Arts Program requires certain documentation
from the grantees but also maintains in the same file any and all supplementary
information provided by the grantee.
1 . Chronology and Development
The files are maintained according to the fiscal year of the grant, which
overlaps the chronological year. Thus, grantees may have funds awarded from
June 1982 through July 1983: Inter-Arts considers these fiscal year (FY) 1982
grants. The period examined encompassed grants from fiscal year 1981 through
1984. Some grantees were awarded grants for all four of those fiscal years.
The information required from the applicants has changed over the course of
this perioa, focusing more precisely on budgetary information as well as
project description and methodology. This nas resulted in the creation of a
new required form, the Supplementary Information Sheet, which was first
implemented in 1983. This, coupled with minor revisions to the application
form, determined that the information required from tne grantees changed over
the course of time. The evaluation questions did not respond to these altera-
tions, as the questions were primarily directed to the presence or absence of
1-7
information. The presence of more detailed information simply meant that more
of those questions could be answerea: it was assumed, but not empirically
tested, that later grantees would have more complete information.
2. Documentation
Briefly, the types of information required from the grantees are drawn from
four primary forms, split evenly between pre-grant and post-grant. These are
presented in Exhibit 3.
PRE-GRANT POST-GRANT
Application Financial Status Report
Supplementary Information Final Descriptive Report
Sheet
Exhibit 3: Information Requirements
a. Pre-Grant Information. The application is the most structured and
detailed of these four documents. It serves to identify the particular
activity for which funding is requested, what population will be served by
that activity, as well as information on the personnel and buaget for both the
project and of the organization as a whole. Various assurances (i.e.,
non-profit status from the IRS) are also required, as well as a list of extra
information (which is not contained on the application form). This includes:
o Project description (one page summary)
o Current membership listing
o Schedules of activities for the coming year
o Staff biographies
o List of grants received from NEA
o Any final reports outstanding to Inter-Arts.
There is a fairly strict timetable attached for this process. For example, the
1966 grants required the notification of intent to apply by September 9, 1985.
1-8
The application package had to be postmarked by November 8, 1965. The
announcement of awards was made in June, 1986, for a grant period beginning
(at the very earl iest) by July 1 , 1986.
The other piece of information required by organizations applying to tne
Services to the Arts Category is the Supplementary Information Sheet (SIS).
This provides for more detail on such issues as revenues and expenses and
provides for elaboration on service and evaluation methods, subject areas to
be addressed, el igibil ity/sel ection criteria and determination of need. This
form was developed largely for this Category's diverse applicants, as it
provided a forum for them to be as explicit as possible with reference to
their needs and aims, and thus provided the Panel members with more information
from which to make decisions and assess priorities. The SIS is often used
simply as a more rhetorical restatement of information previously presented in
the application: its utility is yery much a function of the overall level of
planning of the applicant.
b. Post-Grant Information. The two documents required from the grantee
at the end of the funding period are the Final Descriptive Report (FDR) and
the Financial Status Report (FSR).
The FDR is an Endowment- wide requirement of all grantees. There are no
particular standards, however, for that document. Some grantee organizations
are relatively thorough, while others address merely the facts that the grant
was made, how it was spent and what types of literature were generated or
activities performed as a result. In this way, there is almost no comparabil-
ity between the information contained in the application and SIS and that
contained in the FDRs. The particular incentive for its submission is that no
new grant to that organization can be awarded if that document is not filed.
Of course, if a grantee organization is no longer applying to the Endowment
for funds, that incentive disappears altogether.
The FSR is a standaraized form, consisting of a single page record of income
and expenses. The grantee organization has previously filed extremely similar
forms to prompt disbursement of their grant monies: the FSR lists the sum
totals. This document has the same incentive for submission as tne FDR, and
1-9
can only be used in a limited sense in terms of comparability with the
application and SIS, as it does not list inaividual expenses, but merely the
total amount paid out by the Endowment and the total project cost to date.
Information in addition to the requirements may be provided by the grantee.
This may include samples of the various products made possible by grants from
the NEA as eviaence of successful project completion or of potentially
successful project accomplishment (with the following year's application).
Products range from brochures and books through t-shirts and coupons.
Grantees may also include in their application or FDR any audits or annual
reports.
C DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES
1 . Data Recording Sheets
The goals statement matrix provided a basic spreadsheet outline, which was
then developed and refined to become the data recording sheet. A data
recording sheet was developed for each of the five objectives in order to
provide a standard way to collect information from the grantee files and a
relatively unchanging format for the data entry procedures. Each sheet lists
the information to be collected on the left-hand side of tne page, while
pre-grant, post-grant and calculation form the column headings. Thus informa-
tion extracted from the application was entered in the first column, and infor-
mation from the FDR in the second. All the information collected was on one
consistent form, which permitted data to be amassed by more than one person.
2. Data Avail abil ity
The 58 grantees created a total of 137 grant files. Each file was thoroughly
reviewed and, in the case of missing information, reviewed again before
contacting the Category Specialist. ftice that stage was reached, a meeting
was held to determine tne relative likelihood of finding such information in
grantee records and its relative importance to the study. The decision was
made to go ahead and ask the grantees, but to expect that most of the questions
would remain unanswered.
I- 10
3. Pre- and Post-Data Comparability
The great differences between the types of information required from tne
application and SIS and those required by tne FSR and FDR made comparisons of
this nature extremely difficult, even where possible. In part, this is due to
the types of questions the Endowment asks as part of tneir grant process ano
those that were askea as part of the evaluation process: the latter were
often concerns particular to the evaluation study. Despite the study being
drawn from the types of information that the Endowment requested, the way the
questions were phrased, based on tne premise of comparability, created
significant gaps in the data.
4. Telephone Foil ow-Up
The majority of grantees were contacted by the Category Specialist, informed
of what types of information were required and then told to relay that
additional data to ETI. Grantees who had not contacted ETI by a deadline were
then approached by the contractor. In most cases, the additional data required
significant searches through years-old documentation on tne part of the
grantees. An additional problem arose from fiscal definitions: the Endow-
ment's grant year goes from July to June. Most of the grantees use one that
goes from October to September. Some may also keep records Dased on the
calendar (January - December) year. The information requested thus involvea
recalculations of annual and audit reports and further delays, as well as
questions as to the validity of the figures then presented.
Of the 58 grantees, most were reached by phone by either the Category Special-
ist or ETI staff. Thirteen provided addi tional data.
5. Methodology Caveats
Throughout the application of the evaluation design, it became apparent that
certain types of information were chronically missing. While this is more a
function of the types of questions the evaluation sought to answer than the
'fault' of the Endowment, it nevertheless makes an important point about the
types of information required by the Endowment.
1-11
Comparability between pre- and post-grant data is minimal. Even where tele-
phone conversations produced, for example, some aol 1 ar figures for budgetary
information, the definitions differed so widely between the application and
that subsequent retrieval as to make any comparison highly suspect.
Many of the variables to be used to determine the evaluation purpose were not
present, or were unreliable. Numbers of people served is a telling case in
point: on the application, this number could refer to the entire population
of the region being served, based on the premise that the general public would
benefit from increased opportunities in the arts, not just artists and arts
organizations. Numbers actually served might be included in the FDR, but not
necessarily.
Statistics thus proved somewhat less useful. Comparisons being difficult even
vrfiere possible, most correlations were not attempted. Correlations consist of
the analysis of patterns of the data, for example, are projects with more
staff time funded at a higher level? 'This would be a direct, causal , correla-
tion: higher labor costs affect the project budget. Both variables increase.
An inverse correlation would be where one variable increases as the other
decreases. This type of statistic is performed based on cross-tabulations of
two variables. Analyses scheduled to be performed stressed the changes between
pre- and post-grant data, and also distinctions between planned and actual,
such as numbers served. More complex statistics, such as chi-square, were not
attempted due to the weakness of the data. Ins tea a, basic descriptive statis-
tics and some frequencies (counts) were employed to augment the more qualita-
tive review of the grantee files.
D. DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
1 . Ethnography
Most of the data collected served to proviae a qualitative overview of the
types of projects fundea by the Services to the Arts Category. A qualitative
review is primarily descriptive, and provides information about the popula-
tion, drawing on shared characteristics, rather than a report based on more
statistical analysis of relationships. Specific characteristics of the
1-12
grantees, such as the level funded by the Endowment, especially as demon-
strated by repeat grantees, were also examined. The analysis goes from the
most generic levels (what types of projects are funded) through specific
objective levels (what are the commonalities in volunteer programs) and, in
some instances, through sub-objective levels. This last examination encom-
passes the objectives of technical assistance and information dissemination,
both of which were found to contain sufficiently disparate activities to
warrant their fission into smaller groups.
2. Sel ected Statistics
Statistics usee in this report consist of frequencies, percentages, and
frequency distributions. Occasionally averages could be tabulated. Frequen-
cies consist of the numbers of times a variable occurs, and frequency
distributions refer to the number of times a series of variables occur. More
advanced statistics were not employed due to weaknesses in the data.
<
E. THE EVALUATION REPORT FORMAT
This report is divided into eight sections. The first serves to introduce the
study, the second to present the most general characteristics of the grantee
population. The third through seventh sections analyze the individual
objectives in greater depth, and conclusions and recommendations are summed up
in the final section. Definitions of terms and abbreviations used are
presented in Appendix A. Particular definitions of the geographic locations
are found in Appendix B. Appendix C contains the data bases used for all of
the five objectives analyzed.
1-13
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE GRANTEES
A. INTRODUCTION
The intent of tnis chapter is to present the findings which resulted from the
most generic consolidations of the Services to the Arts' grant information.
While the five objectives each pursue their part of this Category's mandate
fairly separately, there are certain similarities in the overall management of
all of these objectives. These similarities typically concern the project
management, but at the same time also reveal a certain pattern to the types of
projects tne Endowment funds and tne way in which those funds are distributed.
In the subsequent chapters each of the objectives is treated individually,
focusing on the methods used and scope of activities undertaken. This is tne
only section, tnerefore, where all of the different objectives and their
respective grantees are examined as a group responsive to the Inter-Arts
mandate.
The Services to the Arts Category of the Inter-Arts Program is the umbrella
under which support is provided to activities which serve professional artists
and arts organizations working in more than one art form. This is a ^ery
large umbrella, including activities as general as management training and as
specific as locating candidates for jobs or providing access to darkroom faci-
lities. The techniques employed within the diverse objectives overlap to a
considerable extent.
Many of these grantees conduct training: orienting volunteers to an artistic
mind-set, sponsoring workshops and courses or offering lectures. These
various methods may comprise the principal activity of the grantees, or the
institutionalization of a particular process, or may represent simply one of
the ways used to aisseminate information.
Tne more general management characteristics described in this section provioe
some informational backgrouna to the subsequent individual analyses. The
following sections provide a more specific framework in which to interpret tne
Endowment grant program.
II- 1
B. GRANTEE CHARACTERISTICS
Because of the differences among and within these objectives, there are not
many areas wnere comparison among the five objectives is useful. There dre ,
however, some general variables which can be used to create an overview of tne
types of grantees funded by the Services to the Arts Category. These variables
are:
o Grantee location: the address of the grantee organization, grouped
by New York City, Major Metropolitan, and Other. Tnese are defined
in Appendi x B.
o Target area: the geograpnic scope of the grantee's activities,
grouped by local, statewide, mul ti -state/regional , national, and
international areas. This refers to the location and/ or magnituoe
of the population at which the grantee's efforts are directed.
«
o Years in service: the length of time the grantee organization nas
been performing the particular activity (ies ) funded by the
Endowment.
o Years in existence: the length of time the grantee organization
nas operated.
o Project budget: actual pre-grant figure for the budget of the
Endowment -fun oed activity.
o Organizational budget: the actual pre-grant figure for the buaget
of the entire grantee organization.
o Percentage project budget (of tne organizational budget): this
figure serves to identify the proportionate amount of the resources
directea to the Endowment-funded project by the organization as a
whole.
11-2
o Percentage (of tne project) funded by NEA: tnis figure refers to
the proportionate amount of the activity which is actually
subsidized by the Endowment contribution.
All of these variables are also analyzed by individual objectives, out are
usee in this section as an examination of some of the generic tendencies for
these grantees. Rather than presenting frequencies and percentages of the
individual variables, tables were formed to analyze tne possible connections
and correspondences of these grantees.
These tables include the following:
o Grantee location by target area
o Years in service by years in existence
o Organizational budget by years in service
o Percentage project budget by years in service
o Organizational budget by percentage project budget
o Project budget by NEA funded percentage.
These tables were created to address specific questions, the answers for which
would then cumulatively present an overview of the more general characteristics
of the grantees found in this Category.
The data used in the following analyses was collected from the last year
funded, pre-grant information. The data from the last year funded were used
as most representative of the institution's current abilities, and the pre-
grant information due to its relatively consistent presence.
1 . Geographic Locations
Only one of the analyses in this section permitted multiple responses: this
was for the grantee location by target area. All of the other tables repre-
sent unique responses. Some grantees focused on more than one segment of tne
arts population, reaching, for example, both a local and a national audience.
The methods used may have differed, i.e., newsletters may have represented the
national strategy, while access to computer facilities one of the resources
1 1-3
made available to individuals/organizations in the same general area as tne
grantee. Grantee location by target area is presented in Exhibit 4. This
table addresses the questions of the relative geography of the grantees and
their target populations: is one location more prone to particular constitu-
ents than anotner, and what patterns and variations can be ascertained. The
geographic areas used are New York City, Major Metropolitan areas, and Other.
These are defined in Appendix B.
Grantee
Target
Area
Location
LOCAL
STATE
REGIONAL
NAT'L.
INT'L.
TOTAL
NYC
4
3
2
13
3
25
MAJOR METRO.
7
3
9
8
1
28
OTHER
5
1
6
2
1
15
TOTAL
16
7
17
23
5
b&
Exhibit 4: Grantee Location py Target Area
Most of the grantees fall into three groups in terms of their target area,
leading with national, followed by regional and local. While the most common
combination was for New York City based grantees with national scope, the most
common geographic location for grantees was tne major metropolitan areas. Of
particular note is the relative strength across all the different target
areas: while New York City grantees are more likely to be national in scope
than anything else, grantees from otner major metropolitan areas are equally
likely to be focusing on local, regional, or national (or some combination
thereof) populations.
2. Years in Service and Years in Existence
Tne age of the organization, as well as that of the project, were taken usually
as proxies for the overall stability of the organization. This is presented
in Exhibit 5, which presents both chronologies at five year intervals. The
questions asked were: what are the most likely ages of the grantees and their
activities; are there specific clusters of existence/service matches.
11-4
Years
Years
in Service
in
0-b
6-10
11-15
16-2U
21-25
TOT
Existence
0-5
7
0
0
0
0
7
6-10
5
9
0
0
0
14
11-15
1
6
7
0
0
13
16-20
0
1
0
2
0
3
21-25
0
0
0
0
1
1
26-30
0
1
0
0
0
1
31-35
0
0
1
0
0
1
36-40
0
0
0
0
0
0
41-45
0
0
0
0
0
0
46-50
1
0
0
0
0
1
GT 50
0
1
0
0
0
1
TOTAL
14
17
8
2
1
42
Missing:
Service 5;
Existence
2; Both 9;
Total 16
Exhibit 5: Years in Service by Years in Existence
Neither the services proviaed nor the organizations themselves represent
activities of long-standing. Seventy-four percent of the projects are ten
years old or less, while eighty-one percent of the organizations are less than
fifteen. If these two sets are broken out further, the cases lie quite widely
scatterea on the graph. The only apparent tendency is for the ages of the
projects and the organizations to equal, which may indicate that the project
was one of the first activities undertaken by the organization. Most of tne
grantees were part of entities and activities that were older than the period
funded by the Endowment.
3. Organizational budget by Years in Service
One of tne assumptions made was that an older, more established organization
would be more likely to have a proportionately higher budget, with tne
hypothesis that an older (and thus larger organization) woula be able to
implement a larger project. This assumption was not confirmed Dy the data.
1 1-5
The questions to De adoressed, therefore, revolved around that assumption:
are older organizations also more costly? If not, is there a distinction
between younger and older organizations, or is tnere no such pattern? Despite
the nigh number of missing cases, this assumption is borne out to a certain
extent. While older projects are more likely to have higner budgets, organiza-
tions less than ten years old are just as likely to have budgets that are as
nigh. Thus, while the range of budgets for organizations over ten years old
is from $100,000 to nore than $750,000, the range of budgets for organizations
ten years or younger is from less than $100,000 to more than 3750,000. Tne
younger organizations have a slightly greater range, which is presentea in
Exhibit 6. There is a bi -modal grouping for this table: organizations five
years or less which have budgets of less than $100,000, and organizations six
to ten years which have budgets between $100,000 to 3249,000, wi tn six cases a
piece.
Years
Organizational
Budget
in
LT3100K
3100-
249K
3250-
499K
3500-
749K
GT3750K
T0TA
Service
0-5
6
2
3
2
3
16
6-10
1
6
3
2
4
16
11-15
0
1
4
1
2
8
16-20
0
0
1
1
0
2
21-25
0
0
0
0
1
1
TOTAL
7
9
11
6
10
43
Missing:
15 cases
Exhibit 6: Organizational Budget by Years in Service
4. The Project Budget as Percentage of the Organizational Budget
Another table drawn up by the variable of years in service was the percentage
of the project's budget as part of the overall organizational budget. An
assumption examined in this table was that the project percentage would
decrease as the years in service advanced, that is, there would be less
reliance on the Endowment over the years to support a particular project. The
1 1-6
questions to be answerea were whether or not such a relationsnip existea ana
what particular patterns could De discerned. Unfortunately, the information
was lacking in twenty-two cases out of a total of fifty-eight, which makes the
responses found relatively tentative.
Years
in Service
Percentage
0-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
TOTAL
0-10
5
7
4
0
0
16
11-20
3
1
0
0
0
4
21-30
0
1
1
2
1
5
31-40
1
1
0
0
0
2
41-50
1
1
0
0
0
2
51-60
0
0
1
0
0
1
61-70
0
0
0
0
0
0
71-80
0
0
0
0
0
0
81-90
0
0
0
0
0
0
91-100
2
2
0 '
0
0
4
GT 100
1
0
1
0
0
2
TOTAL
13
13
7
2
1
36
Missing:
22
cases
Exhibit 7
: Percentage
Project
Budget by
Years in
Service
It seems that there is probaDly an inverse relationship between the years of
service and the percentage of the project budget. That is, as the years in
service increase, the project decreases its percentage of the organizational
budget. This could be due either to growth in the organizational budget or
decline in the overall size of the project budget, and, judging by the analyses
of individual objectives, it seems likely to be some combination of those two
factors. Of particular interest is the tendency for newer projects to have a
higher percentage of the project budget in the organizational one, ana also
for some newer projects to be the sole activity for certain organizations.
II-7
5. Organizational Budget by the Percent of the Project budget
The questions this table addresses are whether or not a pattern exists for the
relationship Detween these two variables and what that relationship may be.
Basically, the larger organizational budgets are more likely to have a smaller
project percentage, and is borne out basea on two preceaing analyses; namely,
that more established organizations tended to have slightly higher budgets,
and also decreasing project percentages.
Organizational Budget
LT3100K 3100-249K 3250-499K 35Q0-749K GT37SOK TOTAL
6 2
1 1
0 2
* 1 0
1 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
10 6
Percentage
LT3100K
3100-
0-10
0
2
11-20
1
0
21-30
0
2
31-40
3
2
41-50
1
0
51-60
0
0
61-70
0
0
71-80
0
0
81-90
1
0
91-100
1
2
GT 100
1
1
TOTAL
8
9
Missing:
10 cases
13
23
1
4
1
5
0
6
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
4
0
2
15
48
Exhibit 8: Organizational Budget by Percentage Project Budget
Organizations that are budgeted at lower levels seem to contain tnose for
wnich the project funded is the sole activity, as indicated by the relatively
higher percents for the project budgets. Most projects for which the organiza-
tional percentage was fifty percent or more were found at the two lowest ranges
for organizational budgets. Most of the organizations at the highest budgetary
II-6
range had project budgets of ten percent or less. Altogether, however, almost
all of the grantees were funded at less than fifty percent, and almost half of
all the grantees were funded at less than ten percent.
6. NEA Fundea Percentage of the Project budget
The final comparison is that of tne project budget Dy the percentage funded by
the Endowment. Questions asked were based on the premise that the Endowment
money would represent a larger percentage of the lower project budgets.
Particular queries addressed issues of distribution of the amounts fundea,
average budget size and patterns of funaing. Of particular note on tnis taDle
is the presence of all fifty-eight grantees.
Project Budget
Percent LT350K 350-100K 3151-250K GT3250K TOTAL
0-10
0
*
6
3
3
12
11-20
6
4
3
0
13
21-30
4
4
0
0
b
31-40
8
3
1
0
12
41-50
12
1
0
0
13
TOTAL
30
16
7
3
58
Exhibit 9: Project Budget by NEA Funded Percentage
The projects which had a greater percentage of Endowment funding were those at
the lower budget ranges. An interesting distribution pattern also emerged,
where project modes were found at the 0-20% ranges and also for the 31-50%
ranges. There were significantly fewer cases for that middle (21-30%) range,
which produces an invertea normal curve in terms of the distribution patterns.
Most of the projects funded had budgets in the lower ranges and there was on
inverse relationship between the percentage of Endowment funding and the bud-
getary ranges.
1 1-9
C. SUMMARY
The projects funded by the Endowment tended to be from organizations older
than the funding cycle studied (i.e., four years), usually in either New York
City or other major metropolitan areas. The projects represented newer
endeavors for these organizations, but rarely represented more than ten percent
of that organization's buaget. In most cases the Endowment funding represented
more of the project budget for lower budget projects.
The following findings summarize the analyses performed:
o Tne most frequent comoination of grantee location with target area
was one based in New York City with a national scope of activities.
o The most common geographic location for grantees, however, was
Major Metropolitan, that ( is, outside of New York City. 'Major
Metropolitan' is defined more precisely in Appendix b. This
reinforces the Inter-Arts Program's mandate to advance excellence
and implement cross-disciplinary projects or operations on a
national or regional level. While many of the grantees are based
in New York City, many have been established in other metropolitan
areas throughout the country. These grantees are usually either
regional or national in scope, a distinction made largely due to
the presence/ absence of existing services at the national level
and also to the intent and purpose of the responsive grantee
organization.
o Neither the services provided nor the organizations themselves
represent activities of long-standing, as 74 percent are under ten
years old. The organizations represented in the remaining 2d
percent are based on existing professional organizations, often
within an academic setting.
o The organizational oudgets for the grantees do not differ depend-
ing on the age of the organization. A younger organization has
approximately the same range of budget dollars as does an older
11-10
one, although older organizations are slightly more likely to have
higher budgets, based on the Differentiation in budgeting ranges.
o Organizations with greater organizational budgets tend to have
projects which account for proportionately less of their organiza-
tional budgets. This is reinforced by the tendency for more
established organizations to have slightly higher budgets, witn
projects accounting for proportionately less.
o Newer projects represent more of the organizational budget tnan
more established ones. This is probably due to start-up costs and
the initial concentration of resources.
o Projects for which the Endowment-funded percentages were higher
were those at the lower budgetary ranges for projects. A smaller
project tended to have proportionately more Endowment funding than
a larger project. t ■
o In general, newer projects are more cost-intensive than older ones
in terms of the organization's resources.
The more general management characteristics described in this section provide
some informational background to the following chapters containing analyses of
each objective. The following sections provide an introduction to those
analyses.
1 . Analytical Divisions
The types of grantees funded, the activities for which they are funded and the
types of methods employed vary widely. The subsequent division of two of the
objectives studied was initiated due to the extensive differences in those
methods, and because tnere were sufficient cases to make such a division
defensible. Most of the other objectives coul a also have been separated into
smaller groups as well, using the rule of differing methodologies, but none of
those objectives contained sufficient grantees to make such a regrouping
11-11
feasible. For example, the technical assistance objective was aiviaea into
Workshop Assistance, Scholarship Assistance and Technical Assistance, largely
due to the differences encountered with the scope of service. It did not seem
justifiable to compare an organization which provided Scholarship Assistance,
which is a yery specific and restricted activity, with an organization whicn
provided a much broader range of Technical Assistance.
2. Stability of Grantee tetivities
Each of the objectives is distinguished initially by the types of activities
for wtu'ch the grantees are funded. Grantees may change the activities for
which they are seeking Endowment support. Two particular cases are Performing
Arts Services and Film in the Cities, both of which were funded for several
years under the business development objective. In their last year fundea,
Performing Arts Services switched to management skills, and Film in the Cities
to financial support: the former to produce manuals on business development,
and the latter to develop sources of financing for those organizations it had
helped develop. Both are logical transitions in the life of the grantee
organizations. They may also indicate a high degree of responsiveness to
demand for particular services.
The flexibility of the grantee organizations can be construed as either a
strength or a weakness. Many of the grantees altered their methodologies and
scope on a yearly basis, adding or deleting services in order to make their
services strongest and most attractive to their constituents. The
Massachusetts Cultural Alliance is a good example of this type of grantee, as
it consistently expanded its interests in management skills and its own
organizational development, with activities ranging from developing publica-
tions to requesting in-kind contributions from local businesses for their
constituents, as well as providing technical assistance in job searches, and
access to facilities and meetings. Some of the grantees refined a strategy
developed early on in the organization's life, methodically selecting or
rejecting particular courses or activities. The Sangamon State University is
probably the best example of this fine-tuning process. Over the course of the
four years funded (that were studied in this report), the basic structure of
11-12
scholarship assistance to attend a two-week workshop did not alter. Tne
courses changed Dased upon student evaluations, due to particular topical
issues and the availability of particular specialists.
This flexibility may also reflect the grantees' own organization instability.
Tne Association for Resources and Technical Services (ARTS) is a prime example
of this, as demonstrated by tne frequent turn-over in executive directors, tne
activities that changea as frequently, and the eventual dissolution of the
organization.
11-13
III. ANALYSIS OF Th£ TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE OBJECTIVE
A. INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVE A: Determine the extent to wnich projects funded under this
Category serve to develop management skills for administrators and Directors
of arts organizations.
1 . Analytical Divisions
Once the 22 grantees under this objective nad been examined, i t was found
that the major outputs of these grantees differed to the point wnere it
seemed useful to split these into three subobjectives, as the scope and
methodology of the three groups of grantees seemed to be organized around
those di fferences.
These outputs were: (1 ) Technical Assistance, (2) Workshop Assistance, and (3)
Scholarship Assistance. A list of these distributions is found in Exhibit 10.
Scholarship Assistance consisted of grantees who provided scholarships or
tuition assistance for participation in workshops or conferences. Generally,
these workshops were ones that the grantee itself was sponsoring, but the
focus of the Endowment assistance was on the financial aid to participants.
Workshop Assistance consisted of grantees who produced workshops and/or con-
ferences to train artists and arts organizations in management techniques.
Technical Assistance, by default, is everything but workshops and scholarships:
in effect, this ranges from inoividual ized consul ting -type agreements to
serving as tne central location for regional or ethnic interests. While these
grantees may do training, it is not their principal focus, which is to develop
new programs for incorporating the arts into community activities and to
provide and promote opportunities for artists and arts organizations to
develop and refine their skills.
III-l
TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE
YEARS
FUNDED
WORKSHOP
ASSISTANCE
YEARS
FUNDED
SCHOLARSHIP
ASSISTANCE
YEARS
FUNDED
AHA
ARTS
ACUCAA
Graduate School of 3
Community Dvlpt.
Cal ifornia Confedera- 4
ation of the Arts
Gol den Gate
University
Chinese-American
Arts Council
1
Community Art
Resources
Sangamon State
University
New Performance
Gal 1 ery
CHAC
Mass. Cul tural
Al 1 i an ce
3 Cultural Alliance of 4
Greater Washington
Haleakala, Inc.
1
Publ ishing Center for 4
Cultural Resources
Western States Arts 1
Foundation
Southern Art Founda- 2
tion
Performing Arts
Services
Greater Philadel phia 3
Cul tural All iance
Opportunity Resources 4 St. Paul -Ramsey
for the Arts United Arts Fund
SPACE
1
Technical Assistance: 10 grantees; 22 grant years. Workshop Assistance:
grantees; 25 grant years. Scholarship Assistance: 3 grantees; 9 grant years
GRAND TOTAL: 22 grantees; 56 grant years
Exhibit 10: Grantee Distribution by Project Type and Years Funaed
1 1 1-2
Almost two-thirds (64%) of the grantees were funded for multiple years. The
average years funded for each of tne major outputs of tne five-year period
examined was:
Technical Assistance 2. 3 years
workshop Assistance 2.7 years
Scholarship Assistance 3.0 years
Total for Objective 2.5 years.
B. GRANTEE CHARACTERISTICS
1 . Project Staffing
In terms of project staffing patterns, the Scholarship Assistance grantees
required far less personnel time, but also had a much greater professional/
support ratio. These tables are presented in Exhibit 11. Scholarship Assis-
tance comprised short-term projects, usually only extending for several wee<s
immediately preceding the workshop. In addition, the professional /support
ratio is slightly skewed oy the addition of the instructors for the workshops
themselves, especially for Sangamon State University. In that case, tne
workshop would last two weeks, but there would be approximately a dozen
instructors, each working one or two days.
Personnel Data
Subobjectives AVERAGE PERSON YEARS PROFESSIONAL/SUPPORT RATIO
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
WORKSHOP ASSISTANCE
SCHOLARSHIP ASSISTANCE
1 .98
1 .5
1.99
2.3
: o.4i
4.3
Exhibit 11: Personnel Data
The composition of the personnel varies from year to year with no discern io I e
patterns in terms of a sheer numerical one. That is, the increases and de-
creases in staffing do not form a trend as the grantee progresses. None of
1 1 1-3
the grantees reported volunteer workers, and most had either a mixture of full-
time and part-time personnel or else solely part-time personnel. For most
grantees it would seem that the particular project funded by the Endowment was
only part of the organization's activities. In some cases, especially for
newer grantees, however, this was not so, as will be demonstrated in the next
section on budget matters.
2. Organizational Budget
The overall organizational budgets reveal some interesting information about
the relative size of these organizations at the time of their application.
Exhibit 12 provides a table of all organizational budgets, from the perspective
of the changes by eacn grantee. That is, what is the range of the organiza-
tional budget for the first year of funding and also for any year where that
funding may have changed. In this way, the 22 grantees examined produced 31
cases for this exhibit.
Organizational Budget
Subobjectives LT$100K $100-249K 3250-499K 3500-749K GT3750K
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
WORKSHOP ASSISTANCE
SCHOLARSHIP ASSISTANCE
Exhibit 12: Organizational Budget Distribution (Pre-Grant)
All of the grantees in Technical Assistance who changed the range of their
organizational budgets increased them. Workshops and Scholarships were less
directed in their funding changes, but tended to return to the same level.
That is, they may have either increased or decreased their funding, but
returned to the original range of funding the following year.
Scholarship Assistance was more often attempted by larger grantee organiza-
tions. Both Technical Assistance and Worksnops spanned the entire range of
organizational budgets.
1 1 1-4
2
5
5
0
1
3
5
1
0
4
0
0
1
1
3
Almost all (90%) of the grantees were involved solely wi tn service aelivery.
Those that also included aspects of planning tended to drop those and focus
more strictly on service delivery as the grant period progressed.
3. Project Percentage of Organizational budget
Tne project budget as a percentage of the organizational budget reinforces tne
trend for scnolarship assistance to be a function of a larger organization.
The average percentage and the specific range of these are presented in
Exhibit 13.
Project Percent
Subobjectives AVERAGE PERCENT RANGE
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
WORKSHOP ASSISTANCE
SCHOLARSHIP ASSISTANCE
Exhibit 13: Percentage of the Organizational Budget Represented by the
Project and the Range of that Percentage
A particularly interesting point emerges from an examination of tne ranges of
the project budget percentages, in particular the presence of 100 and 210.8 as
the upper values for the ranges. In some cases tne project was the organiza-
tion: there was a complete overlap. In other cases, it is likely tnat the
definition of organizational budget on the application may have been misinter-
preted.
4. Project Budget
Project budgets were examined in the same manner as the organizational budgets,
focusing on the changes that appeared. Exhibit 14 contains the overall at-
tribution of these project budgets.
53.3
1 .9 - 10U
60.5
0.5 - 210,8
7.1
0.2 - 17.7
II 1-5
7
1
4
3
4
5
3
1
2
1
0
0
Project buagets
Suboojectives LT350K 350-15UK $151-250K GT32bOK
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
WORKSHOP ASSISTANCE
SCHOLARSHIP ASSISTANCE
Exhibit 14: Distribution of Project Budgets
Workshops and Scholarships tend to cost less than Technical Assistance pro-
jects. This may be a function of their narrower scope, i.e., the project is
for a specific event or series of events with strict controls established over
length, duration, and possible numbers of participants. This would not occur
for Technical Assistance, which describes particular services offered (or to
be offered) that are more general.
5. Years in Service
Organizations funded by the Endowment for this objective had been in existence
for an average of seven years in 1985. The actual averages and ranges are
described in Exhibit 15.
Years in Service
Subobjectives AVERAGE RANGE
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 6.8 1-14
WORKSHOP ASSISTANCE 6.8 3-12
SCHOLARSHIP ASSISTANCE 7.3 6-9
Exhibit 15: Average Years in Service and Range
A cross-tabulation of the project budget by the years in service producea Ex-
hibit 16, and reveals tnat there is a certain tendency for newer projects to
cost less than more established ones, although almost half of all of the pro-
1 1 1-6
jects examined still cost less than $50,000. Scholarship Assistance tended to
be less costly over time tnan the other two types: this is probaoly aue to
the longevity of the programs and the brief duration of the service.
6. Geographic Locations
There were two variables dealing with geograpny. One referred to the area
served (or targeted to be served) by the grantee and the other referred to the
location of the grantee itself. Most of the grantees served a constituency in
their immediate vicinity and also a more widespread one outside of that area.
In many cases, national coverage may entail activities with minimum personal
contact, such as mailings (newsletters, etc.). Thirty -two percent of the
grantees are listed as serving more than one area. Most grantees were either
regional or national in their primary focus: this tallies very closely with
the Endowment's goals for the award of the grant.
«
Project Budget
Years in
Service
LT350K
$51-150K
3151-250K
GT3250K
TOTAL
0-5
4
80%
44.4%
1
20%
50%
0
0%
0%
0
0%
0%
5
100%
29.4%
NO.
ROWPCT.
COLPCT.
6-10
3
42.9%
33.3%
1
14.3%
50%
3
42.9%
75%
0
0%
0%
7
100%
41.2%
NO.
ROWPCT.
COLPCT.
11-15
2
40%
22.2%
0
0%
0%
1
20%
25%
2
40%
100%
5
100%
29.4%
NO.
ROWPCT.
COLPCT.
TOTAL
9
52.9%
100%
2
11 .8%
100%
4
23.5%
100%
2
11 .8%
100%
17
100%
100%
NO.
ROWPCT.
COLPCT.
MISSING CASES = 5
Average years in service by project budget:
LT350K
351-150K
S151-250K
GT3250K
6.4
5.5
9.0
12.0
Exhibit 16
Project Buagets By Years in Service
1 1 1-7
A surprising number of the grantees are from outsiae the New York City area,
altnough that location is still tne dominant one for Technical Assistance
activities. This is presented in Exhibit 17.
Grantee Location
Suoobjectives NYC MAJOR METROPOLITAN OTHER
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 6 3 1
WORKSHOP ASSISTANCE 0 5 4
SCHOLARSHIP ASSISTANCE 0 2 1
TOTAL 6 10 6
Exhibit 17: Grantee Location
7. Types of Products
The variety of activities tnat comprise management assistance is wery wide.
There are certain anticipated concentrations: Scholarship Assistance, for
example, is involved primarily with scholarship funds and workshops (for which
those scnolarships are offered). Exhibit 18 presents the basic distribution
of the various types of activities in rank order by subobjective. Each grant
file was examined separately, and lists multiple products.
Of particular note is the range and variety of the activities funded for all
of tnese subobjectives. All of the subobjectives pertain to some aspect of
interdisciplinary arts management training, but the range of activities used
to interpret that mandate is astonishing. These activities represent varying
degrees of success: some activities, listed as one-time, may have been eitner
failures, special events, or simply refer to the unique year funded. No judg-
ment was made, therefore, aoout the relative levels of success attached to any
of these si tuations.
8. Case Studies
Wnile most of these grantees used formal methods of training, such as work-
shops, many also used less formal ones. Particular examples from technical
II 1-8
TECHNICAL
WORKSHOP
SCHOLARSHIP
PRODUCT
ASSISTANCE
ASSISTANCE
ASSISTANCE
TOTA
Work shop/ seminar
14
22
8
44
Newsletter
10
lb
1
11
Consul tancies
11
7
0
18
Conference
6
9
0
15
Scholarship Fund
0
0
9
9
Publications
6
3
0
9
Placement Services
5
0
0
5
Directory
3
2
0
5
Production Assistance
4
0
0
4
Promotional Activities
4
0
0
4
Requests for Info.
0
' ' 4
0
4
Ticket Place
0
4
0
4
Manual
3
0
u
3
Internship Program
2
1
0
3
Festival
2
0
0
2
Networks
1
1
0
2
Association
1
0
0
Cal endar
1
0
0
Certificate Program
0
0
1
Computer Hookup
1
0
0
Insurance Plan
1
0
0
Needs Assessment
0
•
1
0
Plan for Eco. Dvlpt.
1
0
0
Exhibit 18: Frequency Distribution of Types of Products
111-9
assistance grantees include the use of festivals as a means of fostering the
development of conmuni ty-based organizations, as the Association of Hispanic
Arts or tne Chinese-American Art Council did. There were three programs which
provided a wide range of services that are particularly interesting, the
Graduate School for Community Development, the Massachusetts Cultural Alliance
and the Publishing Center for Cultural Resources. The Graduate School
sponsored an extremely holistic approach to community development, estaDlishing
ing an association for economic development, assemoling a kiosk of events
(which was dismantled in the evening and reassenblea in the morning), present-
ing theatrical events and running a gallery, as well as developing a manual
for these activities, coordinating a neighborhood festival, and supervising
workshops and otner promotional activities. The Massachusetts Cultural
Alliance ran meetings and produced publications, but also provided extremely
directed assistance to the artists and arts organizations in its community
(primarily Boston). These particular services included maintaining employment
listings, providing health insurance and coordinating two programs with the
business community to develop matching grants and in-kind contributions .
Access to various media and a computer was also arranged for the arts constit-
uencies. The organization also directed some of its activities inward, with a
highly successful fundraising ball. The last organization examined was the
Publishing Center for Cultural Resources. This is particularly interesting
because it proviaea assistance along the entire gamut of publishing, including
services in planning, producing, printing, and finally distributing different
types of documents. Most of the other grantees focused on several or one
unique aspects of technical assistance: this is the only one that follows
such a clearly marked linear sequence.
Grantees prOviaing workshop assistance tended to address those concerns more
specifically -- there were fewer instances of activities not directly related
to the maintenance or development of workshops. There were three organiza-
tions, however, that did provide a diverse range of services, the Cultural
Alliance of Greater Wasnington, the Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance,
and the St. Paul -Ramsey United Arts Fund. The Washington group also provioed
a health insurance policy, and had developed a successful ticket sales booth.
both the Pniladelphia and St. Paul organizations provided extremely diverse
services to their constituents. The Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance
111-10
provided the full spectrum of workshop and workshop-related activities: it was
also inaugurating a ticket sales operation and had sponsored a city-wiae puuli-
ci ty campaign. This campaign had consistea of a series of posters displayed
at bus shelters and the development of a series of publicity guiaes for organi-
zations. The St. Paul organization provided internships, ran a special pro-
jects and advocacy program, conducted needs assessments of many of tne local
arts organizations, maintained a toll-free phone line for information and
advice, and provided information on tax and legal issues. At the same time,
it also conducted workshops and produced a variety of publications about its
services and to provide its constituents with updates on situations in the
Twin Cities area .
The principal distinguishing characteristics of the three grantees in Scholar-
ship Assistance were tne use of academic incentives and the type of documenta-
tion produced by the workshops. Continuing Education Units (CEUs) are given
for workshops sponsored by ACUCAA, and Golden Gate University offers botn a
certificate and a master's program. While Sangamon State does not offer cred-
its for their workshops, they do provide extensive documentation of the course
contents.
9. Subject Areas
The subjects for which assistance was rendered are almost as broad as the
types of products and are shown in Exhibit 19. It should be stressed tnat the
grantees were not limited to one subject area, or one product. The scope of
the project was limited by only two factors: (1) the money available; and (2)
the grantees' creativity.
TECHNICAL
WORKSHOP
SCHOLARSHIP
SUBJECT AREAS
ASSISTANCE
ASSISTANCE
ASSISTANCE
TOTAL
Audience Development
4
8
3
15
Financial Mgt.
3
b
3
12
Info. Dissemination
4
4
1
9
Other
6
2
1
9
Organizational Mgt.
3
4
1
8
Conference Mgt.
2
1
2
5
Tour Mgt.
2
3
0
5
Planning
1
Exhibit 19:
2
Subject Areas
0
3
111-11
If one assumes that the activities offered most frequently are also the ones
most in demand, then one can conclude tnat audience development and financial
management are the skills most in demand. These drt perhaps the most general
of the subject areas adaressed, and the ones most likely to attract the widest
numbers of participants, as it becomes imperative ratner rapidly for any
organization to know now to manage money, as well as how to attract and retain
participants.
10. Numbers Served
The actual numbers served by the various grantees varied widely. Missing,
however, was the most common value, so it is difficult to accurately assess
the numbers and types of people and/ or organizations reached by this variety
of activities. Some grantees focused on reaching other organizations, while
others focusea on individuals (either artists or the general public) and some
attracted both. In this respect, a low number may refer to organizations and
could actually represent the maximum which could be served by the grantee
organization. Another factor which affects these numbers is tne type of
product the grantee produced: a newsletter could be distributed to thousands
of people, wnile scholarship assistance would only be offered to a very few.
Of the ten grantees in Technical Assistance, half were missing values of the
numbers served for at least one year. Of the numbers reneining, the scope of
service varied from six people through 35,136, with a mean of 3,060. Even
repeat grantees reporting for multiple years shifted drastically each year,
although most of these figures referred primarily to individuals, rather than
organizations.
Of the nine grantees in workshop Assistance, three were missing values. All
of tne values refer to both organizations and indiviauals: the attendance
figures reflect the focus of the workshops themselves, which could be designea
to attract members of organizations, individuals, or both. Some of tnese
grantees also produced newsletters. The range varied from 53 through 4&6.940,
with a mean of 32,277.
Two of the three grantees in Scholarship Assistance provided data, which
referred to the numbers of organizations served. The range was from 29
111-12
total amount requested, but a grantee that requests $20,000 for a project witn
a proven track recora and/or is known by tne Panel is more 1 ikely to be
reduced proportionately less than a grantee requesting $10,000 which also
lacks those characteristics. The average age of the grantee organizations is
approximately equal at the time of first funding, so that ranking does not
appear to be a function of the relative institutionalization of the umbrella
organization.
D- Funding Patterns. More than 70% of the repeat grantees have their NEA
funding decreased over the course of time. This is due to several factors,
which include (1) the reduction in Inter-Arts funds and thus corresponding cuts
for all grantees, (2) changes in the prioritization of grantees and thus reduc-
tion in their funds, and/ or (3) monies referred to as start-up or graduation
grants. It would appear that the Panel recognizes and is wary of the tendency
of grantees to ask for the same amount (if not more) from the Endowment each
year, and is attempting, through reductions in funding, to wean grantees away
from a dependency on Endowment monies.
Of tne ten grantees whose funding decreased over time, the average reduction
was fifty percent over the length of the grant, although this ranged from 35
to 75%. An examination of the NEA percentage of the total project budget
reveals that the reduced funding usually corresponds with overall reductions
in the project budget, as there were only four cases (out of a possible ten)
where the decrease in Endowment funding corresponded to a decrease in the
percentage of the Endowment's contribution. This would mean that additional
funding was provided from otner sources to offset the decrease in tne
Endowment's funding and that the overall size of the project budget did not
decrease. In six of the cases the percentage of Endowment funding (despite
the reduction, in real terms, of the funds) actually increased, indicating a
rather drastic reduction in the project budgets.
C. SUMMARY
As there was little overlap in either the scope or the types of activities
performed, it would be difficult to pinpoint exactly the types of activities
that comprise management assistance and create a general typology. None of
1 1 1-14
the grantees replicated their activities in otner areas, and similar grantees
(for example, CHAC, ARTS, and AHA, all of which serve predominately Hispanic
constituencies) differentiate themselves primarily oy the geographic areas
served tnan Dy tne services. The relative merits of the services may be open
to considerable debate, and it is clear that Panel members and Endowment
personnel have their own ranking system as to what constitutes a good or Dad
program.
To briefly summarize the results of tnis section, it was found that:
o Most (64%) of the grantees were funded for more than one year.
Most of these also had their Endowment funding decreased over time.
o Most grantees tended to increase tneir organizational budgets over
the course of the period studied. This, together with the reduc-
tion in Endowment funding, may indicate that these organizations
have launched themselves into sustainabil ity .
o Almost all (90%) of the grantees were involved solely with service
delivery (as opposed to planning activities). This means that the
grantees are actually providing services, rather tnan assisting in
the development of these services.
o Technical Assistance projects were the most costly for this objec-
tive, probably due to factors of scale of their activities. This
type of project tends to include the greatest number of activities,
which, although inter- related, require diverse levels of management
and financial resources.
o Scholarship Assistance was more often attempted by larger organiza-
tions tnan either Workshop or Technical Assistance. This is
probably due to the relatively high cost ana short duration of
this activity.
o Newer projects cost less than more established ones. These
projects may still take a higher percentage of the organizational
budget, but most grantees tend to start out on a modest scale.
111-15
o One-time grantees are funded at lower levels than repeat grantees
This is probably due to the effect of the reputation of the more
established grantees on Panel decisions.
1 1 1-16
IV. ANALYSIS OF THE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE
A. INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVE B: Determine the extent to which projects provide business prac-
tices/services that cut costs or increase quality.
Business practices/ services were presumed to exist for one of three reasons:
(1 ) because the service is offered at below market costs (such as projects
that buy wholesale art supplies and then distribute them at cost), (2) because
the service is offered at greater accessibility to members of the arts commun-
ity (such as pooling funds and purchasing a copier to serve several small or-
ganizations), and/ or (3) because tne service has an arts focus (such as offer-
ing bookkeeping support to artists). Increased quality and cost cutting have
been defined through tnese rationales.
«
There were nine grants studied in this objective which were received by four
grantees. Only one of these was a one-time grantee.
The user benefits which defined this objective are fairly diverse but are dis-
tinctly interrelated. All of the grantees encompassed the three rationales,
largely because these grantees provided particular services. For example, Bay
Area Lawyers trained volunteers to help artists and arts organizations with
legal issues. This legal advice is very definitely provided at below market
costs, which provides much greater accessibility for artists and arts organi-
zations, and, at the same time, is a service directed to that population.
Similar situations arise with the other three grantees, either because they
are providing a particular service or because the scope of their activities is
sufficiently wide to extend over more than one rationale.
B. GRANTEE CHARACTERISTICS
1 . Management Trai ts
The management variables for this objective are of some interest, as these
grantees are designed to provide business support to the arts. One assumes
that the grantee organization will therefore be more business-like.
IV-1
The average nunt>er of person-years devoted to each project by these grantees
was 6.7, with a range of 0.9 to 14.6. The professional/support ratio was
2.6. These constitute fairly labor-intensive activities, as the average staff
member worked at least four months of the year on this one project. All of
the personnel are paid, and there is an even split between full-time, part-
time, and mixed allocations (that is, both full-time and part-time).
2. Organizational Buagets
The organizational budgets of these grantees ran the gamut from under $100,000
through more than 3750,000. While all of the repeat grantees had changes in
their organizational budgets, only one of these decreased and tne other two
increased. Projects stuaied accounted for an average of 29 percent of the
organizational buagets, with a range from 2.3 to 68.9 percent.
3. Project Budgets , ■
The project budgets varied yery little from year to year. Only one changed
radically, decreasing by almost $100,000. The majority of the projects had
budgets greater than $250,000, with an average of $215,000.
The distribution of project budgets for all the grants is presented in
Exhibit 21.
Buaget
LT350K
S50-150K
S151-250K
GT3250K
NO. 3
PCT. 33.3%
1
11 .U
b
55 .6 %
Exhibit 21: Distribution of Project Budgets
4. Years of Service
Data on the number of years that the grantee has been providing the service
was missing in four of the nine cases. Only two grantees reported: these had
IV-2
an average of 12.4 years and a range of 2 through 16 years. Because so few
cases responded, the years the organization itself had been in operation were
used to examine the distribution of project budget by the years in service.
The organizational lifespan had only two missing values (one grantee), with an
average of 12.5 and a range from 7 to 16.
The project buaget by years of organization is presented in Exhibit 22. The
ranges of the project budget are presented in thousands of dollars, with the
Years in Operation serving to define the x-axis.
Project
Budget
ars
LT350K
$50-150K
S151-250K
GT3250K
TOTAL
0-4
0
0
0
0
0
5-8
1
0
0
0
1
9-12
2
0
. 0
0
2
13-16
0
1
0
3
4
TOTAL 3 10 3 7
MISSING CASES: 2
Exhibit 22: Project Budget by Age of Organization
Most of these grantees are part of older organizations. Those grantees whicn
were funded at the lowest level were Bay Area Lawyers for the Arts and Film in
tne Cities. These two also had the highest project percentages of Endowment
funding, which indicates that these may represent relatively newer ventures
for these grantees.
5. Geographic Locations
The geographic distribution of these grants is dependent on the grantee loca-
tion and was yery stable. That is, the grantees tended to provide services to
the areas near to their own locations. Most grantees provioea services (as
IV-3
opposed to planning them), and none extended their areas of service. The
location of tne grantees themselves was somewhat biased in favor of Mew York
City.
6. Types of Products
The types of products developea by the grantees are presented in rank order in
Exhibit 23. The grantees often provided more than one service, but stressed
either assistance in implementing some aspect of business or assistance in
learning how to implement some aspect of business.
PRODUCT
FREQUENCY
Fiscal Agent
Technical Assistance
Education Programs
(workshops, seminars,
conferences)
Publications
Equipment Access
Production Companies
Training (interns &
vol unteers)
Artists' Project
Exhibitions
Library
Presentations
Program Development
5
5
5
4
2
2
2
7. Case Studies
Exhibit 23: Types of Products
All of the four grantees in this objective provided a different range of activ-
ities. Bay Area Lawyers for the Arts provided relatively formal assistance
through presentations and training, as well as the information necessary to
IV-4
puDlicize and/ or document these presentations. Performing Art Services pro-
vided similar training, but also managed a pro auction company, geared
principally to providing access to avant-garde groups. Film in the Cities
conducted a wide range of service programs, as well as more formal educational
ones and also provided access to a number of facilities, such as darkrooms.
Tne Cultural Council Foundation stressed the provision of services principally
to groups in operation less than eighteen months, and created two tiers of
assistance: basic and second level, which corresponded roughly to the stages
of organizational oevelopment.
8. Promotion Techniques
The means that most of the grantees use to promote their own organizations and
its services is through the provision of specific contractual services.
9. Provision of Services
Exhibit 24 presents the distributions of tne services provided to different
types of people and organizations. Grantees can provide services to multiple
types of people and/ or organizations, as demonstrated in the numbers served.
PEOPLE
Art
Artists Administrators Others
5 0 2
ORGANIZATIONS
Art Producing/
Service Presenting IHE Gov't. Consulting
1 9 2 2 0
Exhibit 24: Service Directed Toward People ana Organizations
Most of the services are directed toward individual artists or arts organiza-
tions (such as ballet companies or theatre groups). While some of these ser-
vices are also provided to organizations that are more oriented to arts ser-
IV-5
vice and training, by far the majority of the services provided are to recipi-
ents which match the category's purpose yery closely.
In terms of the numbers of peopl e/ organizations actually served by these var-
ied services, this variable is considerably better reported than other objec-
tives, as only two of the grantees did not provide this information. The
average number served was 1,884, with a range from 69-12,178. If one discounts
that high outlier number, the average becomes 169. Of these grantees, two
respona solely to organizations and two to mixed organizations and individuals.
Grantees serving organizations tend to have fewer numbers served: the
services to organizations, however, will usually be either more extensive or
will involve more repetitions (such as a training course, offered on a number
of occasions to members of the organization).
10. Funding Patterns
The average Endowment contribution to the projects budgets was 14.3 percent,
with a range from 2.3 percent through 44.2 percent. As presented in Exhibit
25, it is evident that Endowment funding has been relatively stable and also
that the grantees are adept at increasing their own budgets, as the percentage
of Endowment funding tends to decrease despite the stability of that funding.
Grantee
NEA CONTRIBUTION
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET
BAY AREA LAWYERS
5000
PERFORMING
ART SERVICES
15000
7500
FILM IN THE
CITIES
10000
10000
CULTURAL COUNCIL
FOUNDATION
25000
30000
18000
25000
11.3
4.9
2.6
44.2
43.6
7.0
7.4
5.0
2.4
Exhibit 25: Endowment Funding
IV-6
C. SUMMARY
To oriefly summarize, it was found for this objective that:
o Grantees serving organizations serve fewer than those serving
individuals, but usually provide multiple and/ or more complex
services to those organizations.
o Projects accounted for almost a third of the organizational budgets
on the average. This may indicate that these projects are
relatively new initiatives, or that these initiatives comprise the
principal activities of the grantee organization.
o Most of the grantees are part of older organizations, and activi-
ties funded by the Endowment tend to represent newer initiatives
for most, but not all , of these organizations.
o The least costly projects had the highest percentages of Endowment
funding. In several cases, these were new initiatives which had
not yet developed more varied sources of funding. There is also a
factor of scale at work: the same dollar amount of a grant will
account for proportionately more of a project's budget if that is
at a lower level. The fact that the Panel would recommend funding
at such a relatively high level, given the aforementioned financial
constraints, is indicative of their perceptions of these projects
as particularly useful and appropriate to the purposes of this
Category.
o The Endowment funding was fairly constant in terms of dollar
amounts, which, given the financial constraints of the past few
years, seems to indicate a certain confidence in these organiza-
tions in general and of the projects in particular.
o Grantees in this objective are adept at increasing their own
budgets, as the percentage of Endowment funding tends to decrease.
This is an important point in terms of the likelihood of the pro-
IV-7
jects to continue should Endowment funding cease. It also
indicates that tne grantee organizations are meeting perceived
needs in their targeted areas of service.
1V-8
V. ANALYSIS OF THE VOLUNTEER DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE
A. INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVE C: Determine the extent to which projects develop new sources of
volunteer support for the arts.
This objective is slightly different in focus than the others examined, as the
grantees do not provide a service, but rather provide support directly to
other organizations. The grantees do not train or provide facilities for the
organizations themselves to perform these particular activities, but instead
actively recruit people wno will carry out specific tasks for the arts
organizations. This therefore contributes only indirectly to the increased
institutional capacities of the arts organizations: by providing free
services, financial resources can be reallocated to other areas, and by
providing a human resource, the potential exists for the eventual institution-
alization by trie arts organization of that resource person and the various
practices developed by that individual.
The approach to this objective was altered to match this shift in emphasis.
Information was collected about both the volunteers and the beneficiary
organizations. In particular, these included:
o Types of volunteers to be recruited;
o Identification of sources of volunteers;
o Strategies used to recruit volunteers;
o Identification of tne primary beneficiary of service;
o Actions the beneficiary organization has used to institutionalize
activities for the recruitment of volunteers.
V-l
The resulting data analysis addresses the additional questions of whether the
organizations recruit volunteers for their own needs or for the needs of other
organizations, and whether or not the projects have established the necessary
elements for volunteer recruitments such as the types of volunteers to be
found, placement procedures and the strategies used to recruit volunteers.
B. GRANTEE CHARACTERISTICS
There are five grantees under this objective, which were awarded a total of
fifteen grants. Three of these five grantees extended for the entire period
studied (four fiscal years).
1 . Management Trai ts
There was a fairly high ratio of support to professional staff, with one
support person for e\jery 2.4 professionals. While all of the staff were paid,
there is a wide variety of distributed time. Two of the five grantees used
only part-time nelp, two used a mixture of part-time and full-time, and there
was only one which used solely full-time labor.
There was an average of 2.3 person years expended per grant, although this
ranged from 3.1 (Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts) to 2.0 (Penjerdel Institute).
2. Organizational Budget
Of the five grantees, three changed their organizational budgets substantially.
Two increased, and the remaining one first decreased and then increased. Of
all five, the one-time grantee was the most expensive. Despite the movement
from range to range, there is a tendency for these organizations to be fairly
large. This is presented in Exhibit 26.
Organizational Budget
Timeframe LT$100K $200-249K 3250-499K $500-749K GT3750K
ALL YEARS 2 4 5 3 1
LAST YEAR ONLY 10 2 1 1
Exhibit 26: Organizational Budget
V-2
3. Project Budget as Percentage of Organizational Budget
These projects tend to represent fairly substantial proportions of the organi-
zational budgets. The grants tend to remain at a stable percent of the organ-
izational budget, as well. The only anomaly was produced by the one-time
grantee, with a percentage of 1.9%. The average by tne last year for all the
grantees was 25.7%, and, correcting for that one-time grantee, this increases
to 33.6%. The overall average (with three missing values) is 29.9%.
4. Project Budget
Contrary to the changes in the organizational budgets, the project budgets
remained fairly stable. Only one grantee changed, increasing in its second
year. The one-time grantee, which was the most expensive in its organiza-
tional budget, was one of the least costly for its project budget. The pro-
ject budget tends to increase over time, as demonstrated by the average dif-
ferential. The average cost for all fifteen grantees was $89,800 (rounded to
the nearest hundred) but was $97,000 (rounded to the nearest hundred) for the
last years of all of the grantees. Eighty percent of the grantees fell in the
$5Q-150K range by their last year funded.
5. Number of Years the Organization Has Provided This Service
The average number of years of providing service for all the grantees is 9.2.
While the one-time grantee was in operation for three years, the average for
the repeat grantees was 20.75. These are older, established organizations,
and this is reinforced by the stable percentage of the project budget in an
organizational sense. All of the these grantees focused on service delivery
for the entire period under review.
The project budget by the years of service shows the predominance of the $50-
150,000 range in funding, irrespective of the years in service.
6. Geographic Locations
Of the five grantees, only one changed its target area, expanding from multi-
state to national over the course of several consecutive grants. Most of the
V-3
grants in this objective are either national or local in scope, and most of
the grantees are located in New York City. Exhibit 27 presents the distribu-
tion of these two variables, and includes the change noted above, so tnat the
five grantees produce a total of six cases.
Target
Area
Grantee
Location
LOCAL
STATE
MULTI-STATE
NATL.
INTL.
TOTAL
NYC
0
0
1
3
0
4
MAJOR METROPOLITAN
1
0
0
0
0
1
OTHER
1
0
0
0
0
1
TOTAL
2
0
1
3
0
6
Exhibit 27: Grantee Location by Target Area
Fully half of these grantees are based in New York City and have a national
impact.
7. Vol unteers
There are three variables specific to this objective which examine the types
and sources of volunteers used. These variables are: sources of volunteers,
types of volunteers, and recruitment strategies. Each of these is examined
separately and then tabulated with another variable. All of these variables
could be multiple: grantees were not limited to a single recruitment
strategy, nor a unique source for volunteers, nor a single type of recruit.
The last grant year examined was used in this analysis for all of these
variables. Most {83%) of the volunteers were found in private industry, and
were recruited to be specialists (S5%) through a combination of direct contact
and advertising.
Most of the grantees remained constant in their choices for these three vari-
ables for every year. Exhibits 28-30 present the cross-tabulations derived
from these variables, and provide further reinforcement for the types of
combinations used most frequently by the grantees. These analyses again
represent possible multiple choices and are drawn solely from the last grant
year examined.
V-4
Types of
Sources of Volunteers
Vol unteers
PRIVATE CLEARING OTHER
ED.
GENERAL
INDUSTRY HOUSE
REFERRALS
INSTITUTION
PUBLIC
OTHER
BOARD MEMBERS
1
0
0
0
0
U
SPECIALISTS
5
0
0
1
0
0
GENERALISTS
3
0
0
0
0
0
SPECIAL POP.
0
0
0
0
0
u
OTHERS
0
0
0
1
0
u
TOTAL
9
0
0
1
0
0
Exhib
it 28
: Types
of
Vol unteers i)y 2
Sources of Volunteers
Sources of
Recruitment Strategy
Vol unteers
DIRECT
REFERRAL
CONTACT
ADVERTISING
OTHER
TOTAL
PRIVATE INDUSTRY
1
4
4
0
9
CLEARINGHOUSE
0
0
0
0
0
OTHER REFERRALS
0
0
0
0
0
ED. INSTITUTION
0
1
1
0
2
GENERAL PUBLIC
0
0
0
0
0
OTHER
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
1
5
5
0
11
Exhib i
t 29:
Sources of Volunteers by
Recruitment Strategy
Types of
Recruitment
Strategy
Vol unteers
DIRECT
-
REFERRAL
CONTACT
ADVERTISING
OTHER
TOTAL
BOARD MEMBERS
1
0
0
0
1
SPECIALISTS
1
4
4
0
9
GENERALISTS
0
3
3
0
6
SPECIAL POPULATION
0
0
0
0
0
OTHERS
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
2
7
7
0
16
Exhib
it 30
: Ty pes
of
Vol unteers by
Recruitment Strategy
V-5
It is clear from these tables that the most common techniques are to recruit
specialists from private industry, either through direct contact or through
advertising. These volunteers are then trained by the grantee and matched
with organizations or people requesting/requiring those skills. The grantee
is the primary agent institutionalizing the volunteers and is responsible for
both the initial identification and matching processes, and also for the
monitoring and supervision of the volunteers in the respective beneficiary
groups. The grantee organization may take some combination of tne actions
1 isted on Exhibi t 31 .
ACTION
FREQUENCY
PERCENTAGE
Training
Eval uation Pol icies
Publ i cations
Seminars
Workshops
Conference
Monthly Reports
Reception
Staff and Art Group Analysis
Staff Monitoring
Total
(6 values missing)
5
4
4
3
2
23
21.7
17.4
17.4
13.0
8.7
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
100.0
Exhibit 31: Actions to Institutionalize Volunteers
A significant number of grantees did not record this variaole. Most of the
grantees concentrated on training the volunteers, not in their respective
disciplines, but rather in how to phrase particular concepts and applications
in terms the art group would understand, such as comparing a management
strategy to an orchestra (that is, the conductor is equivalent to a project
manager, etc.). Many of the grantees had particular strategies to evaluate
the volunteer performance, usually by efforts on the part of staff members of
the grantee organization, although occasionally these might be by the
volunteers themselves.
V-6
It is clear from these tables that the most common techniques are to recruit
specialists from private industry, either through direct contact or through
advertising. These volunteers are then trained by the grantee and matched
with organizations or people requesting/requiring those skills. The grantee
is the primary agent institutionalizing the volunteers and is responsible for
both the initial identification and matching processes, and also for the
monitoring and supervision of the volunteers in the respective beneficiary
groups. The grantee organization may take some combination of tne actions
1 isted on Exhibi t 31 .
ACTION
FREQUENCY
PERCENTAGE
5
21.7
4
17.4
4
17.4
3
13.0
2
8.7
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
23
100.0
Training
Eval uation Pol icies
Publ i cations
Seminars
Workshops
Conference
Monthly Reports
Reception
Staff and Art Group Analysis
Staff Monitoring
Total
(6 values missing)
Exhibit 31: Actions to Institutionalize Volunteers
A significant number of grantees did not record this variaole. Most of the
grantees concentrated on training the volunteers, not in their respective
disciplines, but rather in how to phrase particular concepts and applications
in terms the art group would understand, such as comparing a management
strategy to an orchestra (that is, the conductor is equivalent to a project
manager, etc.). Many of the grantees had particular strategies to evaluate
the volunteer performance, usually by efforts on the part of staff members of
the grantee organization, although occasionally these might be by the
volunteers themselves.
Y-6
8. Case Studies
Two of trie five grantees had begun replicating their services in other
cities. These two were tne Volunteer Urban Consulting Group and tne Arts and
Business Council. The former was extending its organization's services to
other cities through the development of a manual and the establishment of botn
basic volunteer and board candioates projects, as well as a mailing of tne or-
ganization's brochure. The Arts and business Council, on the other hand, ex-
tended its expertise to other organizations interested in starting volunteer
programs in their cities, rather than simply increasing the size of the Arts
and Business Council. In point of fact, the Cornish Institute was one of the
first offsprings of this process, and tne strategies which had made the Arts
and Business Council successful (such as the extensive staff monitoring of
volunteers and the initial assessment of the arts group's needs) were trans-
planted to a number of locations. This was done usually with the assistance
of a staff member of the Arts and Business Council, but the new organization
was treated as an adjunct organization, rather than as an extension of the
Arts and Business Council.
9. Numbers Served
All of the grantees served a mixed population of individuals and arts organiza-
tions. These figures varied considerably from year to year, and were reported
in three or four instances. The averages for individuals were greater than
those for organizations alone, continuing the trend begun in Objectives A and
B. The evidence for varied service figures is clear from a comparison of the
total numbers served for all years (815) with the total numbers served for the
last year alone (374), a reduction by slightly more than a factor of two.
10. NEA Contribution
The NEA funding levels for this objective do not follow a consistent pattern.
The percentages of total project cost and the actual dollar amounts are pre-
sented in Exhibit 32.
V-7
GRANTEE
PERCENTAGE
DOLLAR AMOUNT
Vol unteer
11 .6
12500
Urban
12.1
15000
Consul ting
12.4
13500
Group
13.2
18500
Vol unteer
30.2
15000
Lawyers
24.8
1500U
for the
18.9
15000
Arts
16.1
15000
Penjerdel
7.7
5000
Foundation
4.2
3000
AVERAGE
14875
15000
Cornish Insti tute
11.4
5000
4000
5000
Arts and
Business
Council
15.2
20.8
22.7
14.5
12500
20000
20000
20000
18125
TOTAL AVG. (ALL YEARS)
TOTAL AVG. (LAST YEAR)
15.0
11.9
13667
12300
Exhibit 32: NEA Percentages and Dollar Contributions
If the Cornish Institute and Penjerdel Foundation are treated as single year
grantees, (as Penjerdel was only funded for two years and that funding stopped
before the end of the period studied) a comparision between single and mul-
tiple grantees can be made. The average first year funding levels are 35,000
for these single grantees and $13,300 for the multiple ones, a difference t)y a
factor of almost three.
V-8
C. SUMMARY
To briefly summarize this section, it was found that for the Volunteer
Development objective:
o The project budgets were fairly stable, although Endowment funding
tends to decrease. This indicates the grantees' ability to find
additional sources of funding.
o One-time grantees are funded at lower levels than repeat ones.
This is probaDly due, for this objective, to the much greater age
of the grantee organizations and their previously established
reputations.
o Grants tended to represent substantial proportions of the
organizational budget, despite changes in that budget. The
projects funded by the Endowment comprised, in most cases, the
principal purpose for the organization as a whole.
o Volunteers are recruited from private industry as specialists
through either direct contact or advertising. This appears to be
the principal expenditure of the project, the actual recruiting
strategies.
o Grantee organizations usually combine several strategies to
institutionalize the volunteer activities. In most cases these
involve techniques that either the staff or the volunteer
him/herself uses, such as evaluation forms.
V-9
VI. ANALYSIS OF TK FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE
A. INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVE D: Determine the extent to which projects assist in the development
of financial support for tne arts.
Projects funaed under this objective possess particular resources geared to
raising revenues or facilitating fund-raising activities. The variables used
to assess these resources are:
o Type of revenue to be targe ted/ gen era ted
o Type of sources for revenue generation
o Strategies for revenue generation.
Projects may be developing financial support for their own organization, or
for another. The project focus may thus be internally or externally directed,
and two additional variables were designed to assess this, (1) classification
of projects by primary beneficiary, and (2) institutionalization of fund-
raising capacity by user organizations. These particular indicators provide
for analysis of the specific factors which differentiate this objective from
the others. Together with the more generalized management and institutional
variables, they respond to the issue of whether or not an organization is
structured to conduct fund-raising activities for itself or for other
organizations.
B. GRANTEE CHARACTERISTICS
There are ten grantees in this objective, which were awarded a total of nine-
teen grants. Exhibit 33 presents the range of types of financial development
activities funded.
VI-1
PROJECT NUMBER
Loan Program 5
Voucher Program 4
Cul tural Voucher 3
Ticket Central 2
Materials Voucher 2
Info. Dissemination 2
Residencies 1
Exhibit 33: Project Types
Most of the variables examined in the following sections refer solely to the
last year funded, pre-grant data, although in some instances, multiple
responses were possible and these are so indicated. The last year funded was
chosen because it represented not only the most current information about the
grantee, but also the most indicative data about institutional stability.
Pre-grant information was used because it occurred with more frequency and
reliability than post-grant data.
1 . Management Traits
Due to the extent of missing data and the unreliability of the figures
reported, a professional to support staff ratio is not provided. Six of the
ten grantees were missing support personnel data, and two were also missing
professional staff information. The existing data does show, however, that
almost all grantees changed their staffing plans, with an apparent shift to
greater reliance on non-professional personnel.
All of the personnel were paid, with a fairly even distribution of time.
There were two cases each for full-time, part-time, and mixed use: four
grantees were missing data for this variable. The average person years used
for the objective as a whole was 1.14. Factoring out one-time and repeat
grantees produces these two averages: 0.83 (one-time) and 1.25 (repeat).
VI-2
2. Organizational Budget
The organizational budgets were evenly divided between the low range of cost
and the high. This is presented in Exhibit 34. Three of the nine reported
cases changed their range (i.e., changed by an amount significant enough to
put their cost into another budgetary range); two decreased it and one
increased.
LT3100K $100-24yK $250-499K 3500-749K GT3750K
Missing: 1
Exhibit 34: Organizational Budget
3. Project Percentage of Organizational Budget
The projects were, on average, fourteen percent of the organization's total
budget, with a range from 1-36 percent. One-time grantee projects tend to
comprise a higher percentage of the organizational costs (18 percent as
opposed to 12 percent). This may be due to the newness of the venture, or it
may simply represent a less diversified organization.
4. Project Budget
Most of the projects were at the lowest range of cost (70 percent in the less
than 350,000 range). The remainder were at the next highest level, providing
an overview of the objective as one of the least costly. These project
budgets were also fairly stable: only three changed, two decreasing and one
increasing. The nature of services addressed by these grantees was split
40/60 between planning and service delivery.
VI-3
5. Years Providing Service
The average years in service for grantees was 6.6 years, with a range from
1-13 years. Forty percent of the grantees did not report on this variable. A
comparison with the average years in existence reveals a slightly higher
average (8.7 years), but a fairly similar range (from 2-15 years).
6. Geographic Locations
The two variables in this analysis were target area and grantee location.
Grantees were likely to change their target area over time, and all who did
increased the area covered. Grantees were located either in New York City or
another major metropolitan area, with the highest number of cases in New York
City for statewide activities ana in the major metropolitan ones for local
activities. This is presented in Exhibit 35.
Target Area
Grantee
Location
LOCAL
1
STATE
REGIONAL
NAT'L
INT' L
TOTA
NYC
3
0
1
0
5
METRO
3
0
1
1
0
5
OTHER
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
4
3
1
2
0
10
Exhibit 35: Target Area by Grantee Location
The service provided by the grantees was directed primarily at producing/
presenting organizations or other types of organizations (except arts service).
Many of the grantees provided services to more than one type of organization,
and most did so on a recurring basis.
7 . Revenues
The following three variables pertain to the specific purpose of this objec-
tive, that is, the grantees' abilities at fund-raising and financial develop-
VI-4
ment. These variables are: (1) types of revenues, (2) revenue sources, and
(3) revenue strategy. All of these had multiple responses possible and in-
deed, probable. Many of these variables shifted from one year to the next, in
most cases expanding the number of types, sources, and/ or strategies.
Host grantees concentrated on contributions, rather than earned income as a
type of revenue. Repeat grantees focused their efforts on new sources of
revenue, and concentrated less on current or previous ones. Thirty percent of
the cases for revenue strategy were missing and thirty percent changed their
tactics to include more approaches. Of tne reported strategies, submission of
applications for funding was used in nearly 60 percent of the cases.
8. Numbers Served
At least forty percent of the cases for both service requests and actually
served were missing, which severely inhibits the analysis of this variable.
Of even greater concern is the manifest instability of the responses received,
ranging from 240-20,000 people, and 10-100 organizations. It is unlikelv that
20,000 people could have even received mailings from the grantees, given the
size of the project budgets. This generally refers to the general public
which could benefit from ticket voucher programs. Sixty percent of the
grantees include themselves as a beneficiary, whereas 40 percent of the
grantees are providing financial development services for other organizations.
9. Repeat vs. One-Time Grantees
Of the ten grantees in this objective, three were funded for one year alone.
Repeat grantees tended to be part of larger organizations, but the basic
project budgets for both repeat and one-time grantees were approximately the
same, differing only in the project percentage of the organizational budget.
The percentage of Endowment funding for both repeat and one-time grantees was
almost identical, with one-time grantees getting 28.3 percent of their project
budgets, and repeat grantees 28.4 percent.
VI-5
10. Funding Patterns
The average grant from the Endowment was just over $10,000 for all of the
grantees for the first year of funding, and increased to $10,340 for all of the
years funded. Most (70 percent) of the grantees varied funding levels
considerably. The averages and ranges of Endowment funding are presented in
Exhibit 3b for one-time and repeat grantees (first year of funding).
NEA Funding
Years
Funaed
AVERAGE
RANGE
ONE-TIME
$10170
35000-13500
REPEAT
$10700
33000-25000
TOTAL
$10550
33000-25000
Exhibit 36:
NEA Fu
n di n g
Repeat grantees were funded at slightly higher levels initially and, while
this amount tended to decrease over time, it also increased absolutely 20
percent.
C. SUMMARY
To briefly summarize the results of this objective, it was found that:
o All of the grantees were based either in New York City or in other
major metropolitan areas. This is probably due to the presence of
smaller presenting/performing organizations which would benefit
from collective voucher-type efforts.
o Projects represent an average of only 14 percent of the organiza-
tional buagets. One-time grantees have a slightly higher average
(18 percent). This would indicate that these activities do not
comprise the principal ones for these grantees, but are instead
used to provide additional support.
VI-6
o All projects are in tne lowest ranges of project budget: this
objective is one of the least costly, perhaps because most of tne
financial development activities require less costly personnel to
operate them.
o Repeat grantees were funded at higher levels initially, and this
tended to represent higner proportions of the project budget.
This is something of an anomaly, as the percentage funded by the
Endowment tended to decrease over time for the other objectives
examined thus far.
VI-7
VII. ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION DISSEMINATION OBJECTIVE
A. INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVE E: Determine the extent to which projects disseminate information
about the arts to artists, art administrators, ana other arts constituencies.
The objective as a whole has several characteristics which distinguish it from
the other objectives. These indicators address factors particular to
dissemination projects and include:
o Identification of a target audience
o Selection of function areas to be addressed
o Strategies/mechanisms for disseminating information
o The dissemination product format.
In essence, these indicators answer tne questions of who needs the information,
what information is needed, and how this can be provided.
As with the objective on management skills, there were several major approach-
es contained in this objective. These approaches differed consistently, and
indicated that separate treatment would highlight these distinctions, rather
than a composite analysis which might disguise or alter the essential nature
of the processes of information dissemination.
B. GRANTEE CHARACTERISTICS
There were three major divisions in this objective, comprising Clearinghouses,
Publications, and Other. Clearinghouses are distinguished by their service as
depositories of specialized information. While materials may be published by
these centers, it is secondary to their primary function as sources of informa-
tion. Publications, on the other hand, include those organizations for which
the primary purpose is the production and distribution of various types of
documents. The Other category emerged from the examination of the grantees
who did not correspond to either of the above functions and include, for
VII- 1
example, the Japanese-American Cultural and Community Center and the New York
City Public Library. Funding was provided to the former to develop a working
group for those particular interests, while funding to the Library was
provided to enable it to extend the hours of operation into the evening for
the Performing Arts section.
These grantees and their years funded are presented as Exhibit 37. There are
a total of 35 grants, distributed over seventeen grantees.
CLEARINGHOUSE
YEARS
FUNDED
PUBLICATIONS
YEARS
FUNDED
OTHER
YEARS
FUNDED
Center for Occupational
Hazards
4
Anerican Council
for the Arts
5
Japanese-
American
Cultural &
Center for Arts Informa-
tion
4
Hospital Audiences
Incorporated
»
1
Communi ty
Center
1
Arts International
ATLATL
National Council on the
Aging
1
1
4
Artspace Projects
Metropolitan/
Regional Arts
Council
1
1
NYC Public
Library
1
National Guil d of Com-
munity Schools of
the Arts
2
Theatre Development
Fund
4
National Association
of Artists' Organi-
zations
2
Foundation for the Com-
munity of Artists
Institute of Alaskan
Native Arts
Museums Collaborative
TOTAL: 11 grantees; 25 grants (Clearinghouse)
4 grantees; 8 grants (Publications)
2 grantees; 2 grants (Other)
Exhibit 37: Grantee Distribution and Years of Funding
VI 1-2
Data, unless otherwise noted, are drawn from a grantee's final year funded by
the Endowment, and from the pre-grant information. The final year data was
used as most representative of the grantee's current financial status, while
pre-grant information was used due to its completeness and availability.
Almost all of the grantees focused on information dissemination alone (71%).
The remainder both collected and disseminated information, and were found only
in Clearinghouses.
1 . Management Traits
All of these grantees used paid personnel, although the three different group-
ings differ with regards to the type and amount of personnel used. Clearing-
houses have a 2:1 ratio of professional to support staff and are more likely
to use a mixture of full-time and part-time help, for an average of 1.98
person-years. Publications have a higher professional to support ratio (3.2)
and are more likely to use part-time help for an average of 1.6 person years.
Other has the lowest professional to support ratio (0.6), but also the highest
average of person years (3.46), achieving this through either part-time or
mixed allocations of personnel.
2. Organizational Budget
The distribution of the organizational budgets is presented in Exhibit 38.
There is a tendency for organizations supporting clearinghouses to be smaller
than those producing publications or other activities.
Organizational Budget
Subobjectives LTS100K S100-249K 3250-499K 3500-749K GT375QK TOTAL
CLEARINGHOUSE*
2
3
2
1
2
10
PUBLICATIONS
1
0
1
0
2
4
OTHER
0
0
0
0
2
2
TOTAL
3
3
3
1
6
16
* one missing value
Exhibit 3b: Organizational Budget Distribution
VI 1-3
3. Project Percentage of Organizational Budget
This information was missing in a total of six cases, which rather severely
affects a population of only seventeen. The figures derived from this
analysis are therefore considerably more tentative than for other objectives
with better representations of the data. Clearinghouses had the highest
average percentage (34.7%), with a range from 0.3-100. If the 100 is factored
out, that percentage average reduces dramatically, to 10.3%. Publications had
an average percentage of 15.1, ranging from 2.6 through 31.1. This is a much
narrower range of funding, and indicates that the project funded by the
Endowment comprises a smaller portion of the organizations' budgets. The last
group (Other) had two grantees, one of which was missing this variable. Tne
percentage for Other was 0.6%.
4. Project Budget
The distribution of project budgets is presented in Exhibit 39: most cf these
projects fall into the least costly range. Further examination of all project
budgets demonstrates that projects are fairly stable in their budgets, with a
slight tendency to decrease.
Subobjectives
Project Budgets
LT350K $50-
5
-150K
$151
-250K
GT3250K
TOTAL
CLEARINGHOUSE
5
1
0
11
PUBLICATIONS
3
0
1
0
4
OTHER
0
1
1
0
2
TOTAL
8
6
3
0
17
Exhibit 39:
Distribution
of Pro
ject
Budgets
5. Years Provi
ding Service
•
Neither years in service nor years in existence was well represented for Pub-
lications and Other, with those variables missing in 25-100 percent of the
cases. Of the Clearinghouse values, the average lengtn of service was 6.8
VI 1-4
years, with a range from 2-12 years. The average age of the grantee organiza-
tions was 13.8 years, with a range from 2-47 years. In one of these cases,
the project was manifestly the sole endeavor of the organization, as the
project percentage of organizational budget was 100%. Most of the newer
organizations had much higher percentages of the organizational budgets than
more established ones.
The distribution for Clearinghouses by years of service and project budgets is
presented in Exhibit 40. Most of the projects were located in the lowest
ranges.
Years
0-5
6-10
11-15
TOTAL
Missing: 6
Exhibit 40: Years Providing Service by Project budget for Clearinghouses
6. Geographic Locations
The majority (53%) of the grantees were national in scope, with the remainder
scattered fairly evenly across the other target areas. A surprising number of
these grantees were international in scope (24%). Almost half of the grantees
were also based in New York City, with the remainder divided between major
metropolitan areas and other locations. These were very stable, as were the
target areas, and did not change. A cross-tabulation of these two variables
is presented in Exhibit 41, and indicates that the largest single concentra-
tion of grantees was based in New York City and served a national population.
Project
LTS50K
Budget
S50-150K
$151-250K
GT3250K
TOTAL
3
2
0
0
5
2
2
1
0
5
0
1
0
&
1
5
5
1
0
11
VII-5
Grantee
Target
Area
Location
LOCAL
STATE
REGIONAL
NATL.
INTL.
TOTAL
NEW YORK CITY
0
0
1
b
2
8
MAJOR METRO.
0
0
0
3
1
4
OTHER
2
1
0 H
1
1
5
TOTAL
2
1
1
9
4
17
Exhibit 41: Grantee Location by Target Area
7. Information Dissemination
This section examines those factors which differentiate this objective from
the others. It is composed of the following variables:
o Target Populations and Service
o Nature of Information
o Dissemination Strategies.
These are examined separately for each subobjective and then combined. Most
of the variables could have multiple responses, rather than a single one, as
for a budgetary range. Thus, numbers greater than the population of 17
grantees reflect these multiple possibilities.
a. Target Populations and Service
These variables were broken into three principal categories, as a way of
examining the different groups which could be targeted and served. These
categories are artists, actninistrators, and organizations. While each of
these has separate and specific needs for information, it seems clear that the
various organizations disseminating information .concentrated primarily on the
action of dissemination rather than on a specific target category, as all of
the three groups of grantees examined addressed the needs of all of these
VI 1-6
Subobjectives
Target
Populations Clearinghouse Publications Other Total
ARTIST
Singl e Disci pi ine 1
Mul ti disci pi i nary 10
Special Population 3
Total 14
ADMINISTRATORS
Singl e Disci pi ine 1
Mul ti disci pi i nary 9
Special Population 2
Total 12
1
1
3
3
1
14
0
1
4
4
3
21
1
1
3
3
1
13
0
1
3
4
3
19
ORGANIZATIONS
Producing/Presenting 7
Arts Service 6
Other 3
General Public 4
Total 20
GRAND TOTAL 46 17 9 72
4
2
13
3
0
9
1
0
4
1
1
6
9
3
32
Exhibit 42: Target Populations
VI 1-7
groups, without a significant differentiation in the types of strategies
developed to match the organizational neeas. These varied target groups are
presented in Exhibit 42. Most grantees focused on mul ti -disci pi inary popula-
tions, generally ones which produce or present art. Most tended toward
serving organizations more than individual artists or administrators.
Of the grantees, more tnan 70 percent were missing the information relating to
the numbers served among all these populations. This makes it unprofitable to
pursue any further analysis with this variable.
b. Nature of Information
The nature of the information disseminated is divided fairly evenly between
information that is organization-specific, project-specific, or specialized in
some respect. Clearinghouses provide more information about their
organizations, as well as the other two principal categories. This
distribution is presented in Exhibit 43.
Nature of Information
Subobjectives ORG. PROJECT GENERAL SPECIAL
SPECIFIC SPECIFIC ARTS INFORMATION OTHER TOTAL
CLEARINGHOUSE
9
8
4
7
0
26
PUBLICATIONS
2
4
0
3
1
10
OTHER
0
0
1
2
0
3
TOTAL
11
12
5
12
1
41
Exhibi
it 43:
Nature
of
Information
«
c. Dissemination
Strategies
The grantees all used the same basic strategies to disseminate information,
irrespective of whether that information was directed to an individual or an
organization. The most common strategies were mailings and meetings, followed
by personal services and resources centers. This is presented in Exhibit 44,
and borne out by the varied products developed, as grantees tended to use
either brochures or personal contact to disseminate information.
VII-8
Strategic
?s
Sub objectives
CLEARINGHOUSE
PUBLICATIONS
OTHER
TOTAL
MAILINGS
11
3
0
14
MEETINGS
6
4
1
11
PERSONAL
SERVICES
4
2
1
7
RESOURCE
CENTER
5
1
1
7
NETWORKS
1
0
0
1
OTHER
0
1
0
1
MEDIA
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
27
11
3
41
Exhibit 44: Dissemination Strategies
While most (56%) of the grantees used some combination of mailings and meet-
ings to disseminate information, this was particularly pronounced for Clear-
inghouses, as 73 percent did at least these two activities.
8. Case Studies
There were four grantees of special interest for this objective as a whole due
to their range of activities. These were the Center for Occupational Hazards,
the National Center for the Aging, the Theatre Development Fund, and Artspace.
The Center for Occupational Hazards interpreted 'meetings' as consultancies,
lectures and workshops. Their mailings were extensive, centering around the
production and distribution of data sheets which referred to a particular
hazard. In addition, they also responded to individual inquiries both by
telephone and in-person.
The National Center on the Aging sponsored similar basic activities, including
an assortment of mailings and meeting strategies, but also provided more
direct assistance in managing senior and model projects, as well as exhibit
preparation.
V1I-9
Theatre Development Fund provided a somewhat narrower range of mailings/meet-
ings, as they produced a brochure, held a conference, and maintained ongoing
consultations. The services provided outside of these, however, were quite
diverse. These included the operation of a ticket booth, a system of vouchers
for particular cultural events, studies on service development and expansion,
as well as the provision of sign interpreters for theatrical performances.
Artspace stressed primarily tenant/1 anal ora negotiations in its individual
consultancies, and, although this organization also conducted worksnops and
conferences, and produced several publications, its primary distinguishing
characteristic was its co-sponsorship of tne Lowertown Lofts Design Char-
rette. This was a competition to design apartments which would combine liv-
ing/working spaces, intended as the renovation of an older warehouse in the
area.
9. Funding Patterns
The percentages of projects funded by Endowment monies show a marked differ-
ence between one-time and repeat grantees, despite the relative stability of
that funding.
The overall averages and ranges were found for each group of grantees, together
with those for the last year funded. These are presented in Exhibit 45.
NEA Funding
Subobjectives OVERALL AVERAGE RANGE LAST YEAR AVERAGE RANGE
CLEARINGHOUSE
22.6%
5.8-53.1%
21.7%
5.8-48.1%
PUBLICATIONS
20.2%
4.9-41.0%
25.7%
4.9-41.0%
OTHER
30. U
17.2-42.9%
30.1%
17.2-42.9%
TOTAL
23.0%
4.9-53.1% *
23.6%
4.9-48.1%
Exhibi
t 45:
Percen
tage
of
Total Project
Budget
Funded by
NEA
VII-10
If this information is broken out by one-time and repeat grantees, the aver-
ages tend to be higher for one-time grantees than for repeat ones: 26.1 to
14.7. Grantees funded for a single year are more dependent on Endowment
funding, even though the amounts actually awarded are less. This percentage
is also borne out in the actual amounts granted to organizations for the first
year of funding examined, although it is not as pronounced as for some of the
other objectives. This is presented in Exhibit 46.
Funding Patterns
Subobjectives
ONE-TIME
GRANT
REPEAT
GRANT
AVERAGE
RANGES
AVERAGE
RANGES
CLEARINGHOUSE
$8500
33000-25000
316600
34000-50000
PUBLICATIONS
36700
35000-10000
335000
335000
OTHER
321000
31200-30000
—
—
TOTAL
$10450
33000-30000
$18300
34000-50000
Exhib-
it 46: Funding
Patterns
The average amount granted to first year grantees can be observed to aiffer
depending on whether or not the grantee was then funded again. As with the
management objective, there were no indications in the grantee file as to how
the Panel arrived at these distinctions.
C. SUMMARY
To briefly summarize the results from this section, it was found that:
o Most grantees concentrated on the primary means of dissemination
rather than on specific target populations, focusing on the
development of general strategies to disseminate information. It
is likely, however, that those grantees which also did consultan-
cies tailored their presentations to the needs of the audience.
This is not explicitly stated, however, anywhere in the
documentation.
VII-11
o Most organizations usea some combination of mailings and meetings
to disseminate information, whether the principal focus was the
Clearinghouse or the Publications subobjective. This is an
extremely effective strategy for the dissemination of information,
as it provides both general ana specific information, geared for
either the public or special interests.
o Average funding from the Endowment for one-time projects comprised
a higher percentage of that project's budget than for repeat
grantees. Endowment funding was more important to these one-time
grantees, and their award indicates that these are brand-new
initiatives, sponsored either by more established grantees or
fledgling ones. It also indicates the importance of the Endowment
funding as seed money at the start of these new activities.
o The average amount awarded to the grantees was greater for repeat
grantees than for one-time grantees. As for the other objectives,
it would appear that the continued funding is based both on the
accomplishments of the individual grantees and on Panel knowledge
of their functioning.
VI 1-12
VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. OVERVIEW
This final section is divided into four parts, (1) Observations from the Popu-
lation; (2) Population Characteristics and Distribution; (3) Information Util-
ity; and (4) Recommendations. The first part provides a summary of the infor-
mation in the grant files, the analyses performed, and how the grantees
perceive the application/accountability processes at the Endowment. The sec-
ond part contains the results of the statistical analyses conducted by indi-
vidual objective and also by the grantees as a whole, and synthesizes those
analyses into a coherent and comprehensive overview of the findings. The
third part addresses the issue of what use the Endowment may find in these
results and this report, as well as the more fundamental issue of what these
results may actually represent. The fourth part makes recommendations to
Inter-Arts about data collection and use, as well as to the Endowment as a
whole on monitoring functions.
B. OBSERVATIONS FROM THE POPULATION
The synthesis of data used in this report is a result of thorough examinations
of the Program's grant files for the last four years. Particular variables
examined included budgetary information, scope and extent of services, project
management issues, distribution of activities, overall impact of both Endowment
funding and of the projects themselves, as well as an analysis of the funding
cycle itself. The grantees contacted via telephone interviews searched back
files for several days to locate some of the missing information. While not
all of the searcnes were successful, there was an obvious effort to uncover
information about the projects and organizations from far back in the gran-
tee's institutional memories. Many of the grantees also had specific sugges-
tions for the data collection process and requirements.
1 . Information Requirements
This evaluation ascertained that most of the post-grant information sought was
missing from the files: the grantees indicated that, while they may have had
VIII-1
that information at one time, the Endowment aid not require the types of
documents wnich might most usefully respond to those issues, nor were the
various funding cycles concurrent.
Most of the grantees produced annual reports, which contained the overall
financial records for the past year. While some of these grantees included
their reports in the grant files, these were not required and had no bearing
on future funding. These reports could be a wery useful source of post-grant
information.
The problem with using annual reports, however, is based on the lack of stan-
dardization of the fiscal years. Tne Endowment funds from July through June,
yet the standard fiscal year is October through September. Determining amounts
expended from several years ago required multiple calculations and assumptions,
and those figures bore little relation to pre-grant data. In addition, yearly
totals and other information were out of kilter with the funding cycles.
What the grantees proposed, therefore, was a standardization of the fiscal
years, and the inclusion of annual reports, either as part of the Financial
Status Report, or to replace it.
2. Budgetary Constraints and Concerns
Another concern mentioned was the scope of the application and the overall
content of the grant files, in particular the budgetary information. The
budgets developed for the application bear only a limited resemblance to the
actualities of the grantee's financial status for the extent of the grant
period. These budgets are developed based on eighteen-month projections of
contributions and earned incomes: but those contributions and incomes do not
exist in a static or stable environment. Funding for the arts is largely a
'catch as catch can' proposition, and the grantees are caught in several binds.
One needs the Endowment funding to get other contributions, yet one needs those
to get the Endowment funding. One has to request Endowment funding eighteen
months in advance, but most of the other contributions are from organizations
with different funding cycles, so other contributions are probably hypothetical
VI1I-2
projections. The Endowment is likely to award less than the amount requested:
the grantees are also likely to receive less than their early projections of
other contributions. So the whole project may be drastically reduced in scope
from the application to the actual implementation. While this provides a
rationale for the vagueness of the project descriptions in the application, it
is also astonishing that as much as is accomplished could be in this framework
of suppositions.
C. POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS AND DISTRIBUTIONS
1 . Overview
The two principal comparisons made with the evaluation data are the differ-
ences/similarities between the individual objectives of the Services to the
Arts Category and the population of the grantees as a whole, and those between
repeat and one-time grantees.
There was extensive variation among all of the grantees, as well as intra-
objective. The Services to tne Arts Category is extremely diverse: the
analyses of these different activities are of some interest, in terms both of
the types of activities and questions of project management.
Summaries of the principal findings and of the grantees as a whole are pre-
sented in the following paragraphs. These are grouped initially by the gran-
tees as a whole, and are then broken out into individual objectives.
2. Projects as a Function of the Grantee Organization
Basically, projects represented either yery small percentages of the organiza-
tion, or else fairly substantial percentages. Almost all of the organizations
had other activities which accounted for more than half of their operating
budgets. There was a slight tendency for older organizations to have higher
budgets, and for projects studied to represent diminishing allocations over
the course of time. In some of the cases studied, however, the project was
the first, or among the first, activity attempted by the organization, as
demonstrated by the equality of years in service and years in existence. The
VIII-3
Endowment grant accounts for proportionately larger shares of the funding for
smaller projects: there is less variety in the numbers and amounts of exter-
nal funding employed. Most of the grantees funded by the Endowment were unaer
fifteen years old and were based in major metropolitan areas, although there
is a tendency for grantees in New York City to focus their efforts on projects
of national impact more so than those based in either major metropolitan
locations or other areas.
3. Variances in Objectives
Management Assistance (Objective A) comprises technical assistance, workshops
assistance, and scholarship assistance. While the activities of these three
overlap to a certain degree, there is a pronounced tendency for scholarship
assistance grantees to be part of larger organizations than either of the
other two. Technical assistance grantees are located primarily in New York
City and have larger project budgets than the other two, although their
organizational budgets also tended to increase over time. Workshop assistance
projects account for a larger percentage of the organizational budget,
although there is a general tendency for newer projects, as well, to cost more
than more established ones, probably due to initial start-up costs. Many of
the projects demonstrated strong linkages between reductions in Endowment
funding and corresponding reductions in the project budget. There is also a
pronounced tendency for repeat grantees to be funded at higher levels (for the
first year studied) than one-time grantees.
Grantees offering business practices (Objective B), on the other hand, demon-
strated a certain facility at increasing their own project budgets despite
reductions in Endowment funding. There is also a parallel tendency for tnese
grantees to have larger project budgets than those under other objectives.
Volunteer development (Objective C) tends to be. a function of larger organiza-
tions, with fairly stable project budgets. Most of these grantees focus on
the recruitment of specialists from private industry, either through direct
contact or through advertising. One of the particularly interesting activi-
ties was the training provided to volunteers in terms of relating their abil -
ities and involvement to an arts environment.
VIII-4
Financial support (Objective D) projects were funded at the lowest range of
project budgets, but represented either very large organizations or else \/ery
small ones. While one-time grantees accounted for a higher percentage of the
organizational budgets, probably due to the newness of those efforts, there
were not other significant differences between repeat and one-time grantees
for financial support activities. Contributions from public and private
sources accounted for their principal fund-raising endeavors, rather than
earned income sources.
Information Dissemination (Objective E) projects tended to do just that, al-
though clearinghouses also collected information. Clearinghouses also tended
to be operations of smaller organizations, although most of these projects
were in the least costly budget range. Newer organizations have higher pro-
ject percentages than older ones, and one-time grantees have a corresponding
higher percentage of Endowment funding than repeat ones, although the actual
dol lar amount is less.
D. INFORMATION UTILITY
The particular questions this section addresses are what types of information
have been collected, what these can tell us, and what the Inter-Arts Program
may be able to do with this information.
Essentially, the types of information collected are a distillation, through a
management filter, of the data collected by the Inter-Arts Program. Because
the information was collected and analyzed by people outside of the Endowment,
there is an unbiased appraisal of the operation of the projects, irrespective
of the Program judgment about their qual ity.
Most of the grantees, based solely on management concerns and by the types of
information provided, probably would not be funded by anyone unfamiliar with
the field. This is offset, to a certain degree, by Panel ist knowledge and the
provision of site visit reports. The types of information requested are, more
often tnan not, presented in a form which can best be described as nebulous.
There are few internal checks and balances, and fewer attempts at monitoring
the ongoing project. This is related to two factors, the first being the
VIII-5
tentative nature of the proposed project, and the second being the necessity
for the required forms to be sufficiently broad to encompass as many of the
differing activities as possible (which renders the forms generic to a fault).
The information collected is a greatly condensed overview of some of the basic
activities funded by the Inter-Arts Program over the past four years. While
much of it is unstable for the purposes of advanced statistical analysis, it
provides a useful descriptive matrix of some of the more general traits of the
Category as a whole and of tne five objectives analyzed in particular.
There are two principal uses to which the Inter-Arts Program could put this
information. The first is the ongoing maintenance/updating of the data base
to serve as a means of monitoring grantee performance. Category Specialists
could check oack through the funding histories more readily and also prepare
complete briefing profiles for Panelists' review. The second is its use as a
tool for further research, addressing such questions as how the scope of
activities changes over time for repeat grantees, or the relative likelihood
of certain volunteer activities to 'take off in a particular city, or to
drive the investigation of Endowment funaing impact.
E. RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations for the Inter-Arts Program are diviaed into two types:
those relating to the information collection processes and those directed at
the management level .
The data collection procedures used by the Endowment for the application are
adequate, and can be fairly detailed, depending on the grantee. The data
collection procedures after the grant has been awarded need to be improved and
the information requests could be refined to specify precisely what, and in
what detail , needs to be addressed.
1 . Data Collection
o Alter the purpose statements in the application to specify the
scope of the project alone.
VI 1 1-6
o Either add a section to the application for a description of the
organization's purpose or else require the submission of the
organization's informational brochure.
o Standardize definitions of terms and fiscal years.
o Include more specific questions on the monitoring procedures to be
used in the application. (For example, How are the evaluations to
be carried out? Who is responsible? What will be done with those
eval uations?)
o Change the time of submission of the Supplementary Information
Sheet from with the application, to just after the grant award is
made. This will permit the grantees to make more realistic assess-
ments of project scope based on their available funding.
o Have the grantees resubmit an application form at the ending of
the grant period. This provides the Endowment with a directly
comparable measure of project accomplishment.
o Strengthen the requirements of the FDR to include specific project
accompl isnments, not merely a superficial retelling of what was
done, but rather how it was accomplished and concrete examples of
who benefited from those services.
o Request that copies of Annual Reports and Audits be submitted with
the FDR.
o Specific questions could be used as part of the review criteria,
which would provide the grantees with more structured direction
for completing the application forms, and at the same time, pro-
vide the Panel with equivalent measures.
2. Project Management
The actions taken by the Program to monitor the grantees' performance reveal
some interesting facts, which could be altered to the benefit of the Endowment.
VIII-7
o The data are not comparable throughout the project cycle. Infor-
mation received on the application is not addressed again, for
example, nor are the same requirements made for post-grant infor-
mation as for pre-grant.
o There is no institutional mechanism to maintain any project infor-
mation in a readily accessible manner. Either it is contained in
file cabinets or boxes, or it is solely in the head of the respon-
sible specialist. While there is some overlap in those two
sources, it is scarcely complete.
o Site visits are used intermittently and primarily to determine if
funding should be awarded again.
Specific alterations to the comparability of the data could be addressed
through judicial additions to and deletions of existing instruments.
The institutionalization of project information poses a particular problem, as
it seems evident that much of that data is not in a written form. It is in-
stead based on personal contact and the steady accumulation over years of
knowledge about the principals working for the organization and the concomitant
increase in information about that organization from others in the field.
While the automation of information will be of assistance in monitoring project
performance and easier access to project data of past and ongoing efforts, the
inclusion of that qualitative information might be incorporated through a
series of annotations throughout the project file. The initial outlay of time
and effort would, however, be quite extensive, but the updating would not be
as laoor-intensive and would provide for greater access to information about
the Inter-Arts Program as a whole, as well as grantee activities.
The use of site-visits is an excellent evaluation tool, which has been greatly
reduced in effectiveness due to its expense. Many of the site visits were
conducted as part of a series performed by one individual in a fairly short
timeframe. While the specialist often provided an indication as to the types
of questions which needed to be addressed — thereby focusing the meetings
between the visitor and the grantee staff -- more definition is needed as to
VIII-8
the purpose for the site visits. If they are to be used as an evaluative
tool, they should be more rigorous. If they are to be used in a somewhat more
qualitative manner as an indicator of the grantee's performance and compe-
tence, then that should also be made more explicit.
In general, the project monitoring responsibilities need to be at the same
time clearer and more thorough.
F. EVALUATION PROCESS
This initial evaluation effort has been a lengthy and relatively expensive
process, being both cost- and labor-intensive. Future evaluation efforts need
not be, now that the background information has been collected and a database
established. What Inter-Arts will need to do is to maintain and update these
existing files, which present them with an accurate historical accounting of
the individual grantees. The Program staff, at this point, can conduct the
evaluations themselves with respect to those variables already established in
the computer files, and can certainly add much more qualitative information
about the actual functioning of these grant programs. The evaluation will
shift from a strictly external one, with an outsider's perspective, to a less
external one, with an insider's perspective. While the Endowment is still not
part of the grantee organization itself (which would make the evaluation an
internal one), it certainly has more overlap with the realities of those
grantee organizations. In this way, the Program staff will be able to build
upon this effort.
VIII-9
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
The following definitions are provided to enable the non-statistical reader to
understand the primary research terms used in this report, as well as provid-
ing the statistical reader with the operational definitions used for this re-
port. The definitions are presented in alphabetical order, and are followed
by explanations of the principal abbreviations used.
Definitions
Average. The average is a mathematical term which describes an estimate of
central tendency. It is determined by summing the values of all of the group
and dividing that sum by the number of values. It is useful in determining
the most likely value of a certain group of variables. An example would be
the average cost of an artist's paintings: she sold five, at prices of $250,
$175, 3300, 3238 and 3327. The total of these prices is $1290, divided by
five, the number of paintings, for an average price of $258.
Correlation. A correlation describes and defines the relationship Detween two
groups. There are two principal types of relationships: direct and inverse.
A direct correlation is one where the movement of each group is in the same
direction, ie., as one increases, so does the other group. An inverse
correlation is one where the movement is in opposing directions, i.e., as one
group increases, the other decreases.
Cross-tabulation. A cross-tabulation (or cross tab) is the graphic represen-
tation of a correlation between two groups. Each group is presented along one
of the axes of the graph, and the respective combinations of the two groups
are usually broken out in a grid.
Descriptive Statistics. This is the general name by which the most basic sta-
tistics are known, as they serve principally to describe the particular attri-
butes of groups. The most common descriptive statistics in this report are
the mean, percentage, and range.
A-l
Frequency. Frequency refers to the number of times a particular thing or
event occurs.
Frequency Distribution. Frequency distribution refers to the pattern formed
by the numbers of different things or events. It is formed by a series of
frequencies, usually arranged by some type of scale. Almost all of the exhib-
its in the report use this statistic. Another name for this is a distribution
pattern.
Mean. This is the formal statistical term for average.
Missing. Often when an analysis is conducted, some values will not be pre-
sent. The statistical term for such absences is missing. Normally, partic-
ular statistics, such as frequencies and percentages are based on the avail-
able number of cases. For example, if there are a total of twenty-five art
galleries operated by a grantee, but only nineteen have reported the numbers
served, then averages and other statistics are calculated based on those nine-
teen cases.
Mode. Mode refers to the most common frequency. It may also correspond with
the mean, but does not have to. For example, there are twenty-five galleries.
Of these, nine exhibit modern paintings, six exhibit works of new artists in
mixed media, five exhibit watercolors, and the remainder an assortment of folk
art and lithographs. The mode is nine, referring to those galleries that
exhibi t modern paintings.
Out! ier. In most distributions, the various frequencies will fall fairly
closely around the mean. In some cases, however, the frequency may occur at
some distance from both the mean and the bulk of the other frequencies, often
occurring well away from those other frequencies. These cases are referred to
as outliers. Such an occurrence usually happens to a ^ery small number of
cases, but oecause of their distance from the rest of the values, these can
distort the mean. For example, if that painter who sold five paintings at an
average of $258 instead sold one of hers at $1500 (the outlier) rather than
$300, her average price per painting would become $498.
A-2
Percent. Frequency refers to the actual number of time some value occurs.
The percent makes it meaningful in the context of the rest of the values for
that variable. Percent (or percentage) is determined by taking some value,
multiplying that by 100, and then dividing by the total number of values.
Range. This refers to the distance between the greatest and the least values
for some variable. The original range of prices for that artist's paintings
is from $175-3327. This may also be represented by the difference between the
highest and lowest values, so that the range for these paintings is $152.
Value. This refers to the actual number or amount for a particular case.
Each objective studied has several analytical parts, which are called
variables. The numeric responses by each grantee for those variables are the
values.
Variable. This is simply the statistical term for the group of values for one
particular trait.
Abbreviations
There are four commonly used abbreviations presented on the Exhibits. These
are:
LT = 1 ess than
GT = greater than
Pet. = percent
K = thousands of dollars.
A- 3
APPENDIX B
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION OF GRANTEE ORGANIZATIONS
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION OF GRANTEE ORGANIZATIONS
The "Geographic Location of Grantee Organizations" classification category has
been divided into three subcategories:
o New York City Metropol itan Area
o Major Metropolitan Centers
o All Other Locations.
These subcategories are defined below.
New York City Metropolitan Area
For purposes of this evaluation, the New York City Metropolitan area is de-
fined as the five-borough area, Long Island, Westchester County and the suburbs
of Connecticut and New Jersey. Over the past four grant cycles, 59 grants have
been awarded to organizations with New York City metropolitan area addresses.
Major Metropolitan Centers
Major Metropolitan Centers include cities (including their suburbs) with popu-
lations of 350,000 or greater according to the 1980 Decennial Census of the
U.S. Over the past four grant cycles, 64 grants have been awarded to cities
which fall into this subcategory. A listing of those cities follows:
o Atlanta, GA
o Boston/Cambridge, MA
o Buffalo, NY
o Denver, CO
o Houston, TX
o Kansas City, M0/KS
o Los Angel es , CA
o Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN
o Milwaukee, WI
o Philadelphia, PA
B-l
o Phoenix, AZ
o San Diego, CA
o San Francisco, CA
o Seattle, WA
o Washington, DC
All Other Locations
Grantee organizations based in cities with populations under 350,000 or organ-
izations located in rural areas fall into this category. Fourteen grants
which fall into this category have been awarded since 1980. These locations
include:
o Anchorage, AK
o Concord, NH
o Curmiington, MA
o Madison, WI
o Norran, OK
o Raleigh, NC
o Santa Fe, IW
o Springfield, IL
o Sweetbriar, WV
o Teaneck, NJ
B-2
APPENDIX C
DATA BASES FOR THE SERVICES TO THE ARTS CATEGORY
DATA BASES FOR THE SERVICES TO THE ARTS CATEGORY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. Data Base for Objective Al : Technical Assistance C-l
2. Data Base for Objective A2: Workshop Assistance C-ll
3. Data Base for Objective A3: Scholarship Assistance C-21
4. Data Base for Objective B: Business Development C-30
5. Data Base for Objective C: Volunteer Development C-39
6. Data Base for Objective D: Financial Development C-47
7. Data Base for Objective El: Clearinghouses C-55
8. Data Base for Objective E2: Publications C-64
9. Data Base for Objective E3: Other Information Dissemination
Activities C-73
o <=•
s
2 Z
3 2
> «j
— m
— o
- O LJ
in tt >
in
m
Q
r^
a
^^
d
o-
3
r*
C-l
r-i
<->
-a
<-»
cvi
I
■C
i
-c:
1
o
1
o
1
i
m
rx
u
(N4
u
m
in
in
~o
in
^
en
^*
en
•o
-a
-o
*■
•*-
^*
^*
^
«r
in
m
T3
u->
T3
m
a
in
m
i
4
i
*%
•
*
i
i
CO
i
£
r*
Jo
rx
<x
rvi
r-i
ua
rM
K>
l_>
K>
^
5542
£222
U-5 <« U~J
» CJ O* *» r«4
-o
m
<x
r*->
h.
w.
L_
o
C*4
r~
r^
3
i->
3
tx>
CT»
s
CT-
CV|
CT*
rM
O
—
a
(D
o
o
C*
■=
<o
C
o
*A
oi
in
t
1
at
ai
<%*
Cvj
C*
in
JZ
in
•
m
CX
ac
rM
ae
lO
^-
ifl
*/»
-o
in
-o
w-
-o
»
*■
O
^
in
l
IT)
1
5
in
I
in
i
k.
in
i
a
a.
m
o
IT)
1
o
a.
1
3
C
r*
3
a.
3
r*
M
3
a.
(N
a.
r*
•w
a.
r-j
s
rs*
*
M
k_ ■=> i_ r-.
o m u m
3-S 8s S
C-l
o o
o o O
I
•O ■=> —
■= <=s
* g
HI —
in
in o ^ a
n u m u
•O CSI
<_) — —
5 a
3
■o u*"> -o un »_)
r»i fc C1* k £• Jt ftf *& S3
N U) M O M
3
S £ 2 S
r- c r> u c_j u o u m « K) l, ^ t. o
o- — -o r-». cm r*» r-* 3 m a -^ a cm
— * - cm on m
o *v o c cm
( — i— i«i—i -^(-.i a/ i ai i oj i ai »
u-i nm£r4£(H£in£in amaecMoecMaemacu')
m
m
in a*n — in — in — m —
vr> ^- u-i
CM Q| CM
o io o m a in u in
CM Ol CM O. CM EL
*■ fib «■ O — O
CM O l-"i
o. cm a. cm
o * w *
C-2
in »
o o
r» in
•—iiy hi m CD
• cm r*»
tO OD • • CM
r*. r*» m
O CL
o. o
cm cm cm »* — * ~«
— — CM
l/l
■»
o
o
e
Q.
o
O
l/l
1— 1
OJ
*^*
o
<b
^
k.
w
-*-•
Q.
Q.
to
1
C
t_i
g
!•»
3
i/«
in
a. a. c_)
s
£ 5
m
,_,
f**
«=>
— .
,_,
o
3
OD
rM
1—1
CN|
t-i
-a
t_]
CM
O
i
.c
C-4
1
j=
i
.e
l
1
•O
1
CN|
•
u->
rsi
*j
r^
£
u"i
m
u->
CN*
-o
CO
^p
i/>
w
-o
-o
-o
Mr
•*■
^
♦
MT
■*r
in
■o
tn
-o
un
-a
an
£
m
in
vn
•
"■
i
»•
l
f%
i
i
UO
i
<x
i
CM
£
CM
cfe
rx
o*
<x
CM
£
CM
*
rsi
MT
-^
CNI
(-D
IO
<->
r*-i
•►
—
*#■ «■ -o -o lti <* tr) m* u-t -a -o -o Mr «r -o.**-o*y»*rir»Mri/t~am-oi_
Mr ♦ » » w » » mp ■» » » » ■» » — m- -,•»_•»_ ■•- o
— E CM
c
O
(_>
r^
CJ
O
CM
t_>
in
—
CM
o>
lT>
&•
OD
CJ<
s
CJ-
CM
■»
o
c
CM
c
^
c
c
■O
1
*«
in
-c
CM
.£=
CM
■e
m
.c
in
J*
-o
in
MT
m
MT
i/t
-a
IP
-o
>"»
Mr
MT
m*
OJ
m
-o
m
i
-O
in
i
~
m
i
-o
m
i
•»
CM
3
CM
3
CM
3
CM
3
CM
X
Mr
a.
-—
a_
CM
O.
1— >
a.
M*
<r i— k_ k. l o c cn
9>r«i o — > o a oo or*
CO U»C>i l/l«« lO o ui o>
mi ai i ai i OJ i ai t
-»- u-i o m o m o un o Ln cj
k. i 5* » a. i a> i o. i
ai cni o. c^i a. t>4 a. wg.eN
S$? 35 ^
C-3
o o
■
e at
o k.
•=> o
o o
•o <=■
lit u*
& -5
a a.
> ai a.
w a- o
as «■> g
3
— •■ ot
■ m cr ao a* o
lj -o i_> u-5
B> C-4 O —
s s
a ex
acMarsixinaem
■■"■»
s
w ^- -a -« m ▼ uj ^ m -« -« -a ^- ■w -« ^<Oi/i<ruiYji<Oi/i4L-0 t *w -o -a
*■ ■*- *■ ■«•" «* •» *•" ^ «*" *r ■*■ ■*■'»■«■— ^■-,-^—^— ^-5-*- •'»•'*■ •^"•**
3 S3
m'ginvin'Dingin m
C-4 k. C* fc_ r^i ^ M « (N ^ (N
« CO •« LD M (2
in oi m - .u-3 — , un — . u-> — . ui
* * y - y
o* t_j -*■
i- I
a m am o m a m t_>
» a- ■«" ca — o i
<§-£
«x I
3s 5!
C-4
3 S
» —
CM O
o <=>
o o — — —
1/1 er a*
tf* w t»
at a cl
— <=■ ■=.
co <• o.
O l/l
o o
o r<4
•=• <=>
2 £ 3
2 8? «-> a -
c_l ■=> <_J u")
fc.Ok.rx
5 2
52
c_)
rx
c_l
-©
<— )
—
_4
rx
•=
rx
O
o
•o
rx
t
1
c
1
1
1
1
CX
o
<N4
u
u"i
m
m
rx
en
^
en
^
en
-o
-o
4
^
»
♦
^*
^"
«r
■*■
■o
m
■o
in
-o
lO
£
m
u->
m
>•
■
>»
i
»•
1
i
LO
i
<x
i
£
rx
J5
r*
«x
rx
a.
rx
i_)
rx
CM
CD
r-r»
cj
t->
at
^
■=
—
. m o> co
oi « in
-c rx
m — . in — . in — . m
— ic rx
rx *v rx
or. rx errx o— ooo as? o rj
eo eo wi rx i/»— in o in o
— i — • i oi> a«i oil a* i
.sin ■inaecxaerxaemaein
— in — in o in o m o in o in u
.01 k.1 a. i a i a I ov i «x
<f»<2:»<s--c3-acS-Rc§-»S5
in
I
C-5
> w
u e «
S — hi
»— — o
g 2 ~
Q k. SI
k
a a.
in
3
25
oo
IT)
»
«•
t"*>
in
r*.
w
o-
in
3
Ol
<->
OI
CJ
-O
t_>
<=>
CXI
o>
"O
1
1
i
-C
1
j=
1
cs*
lO
m
u
oh
«_*
(Tn|
*_»
m
in
-**
-a
-o
tn
-»■
U")
L/1
-o
-a
-*•
«•■
^
-*■
^
«r
1
<r
m
t
<z
m
I
•a
i
T3
4
1
-a
in
I
<r
in
I
c*
5
c*
oi
£
CM
£
C*
i
CM
<x
cm
r>4
►1
<x
^
•**
rs«
to
u
fs
s
iCN CJ CM CJ W
» K — £ cm
— -CM
m *« in .c
in ai in x
«r i — . i
u r- i cm
k.
k.
k.
k.
-*-»
OI
Oi
0j
Ol
-*-
■*->
-o
k.
«-<
CJ
o
CJ
C_l
c->
(_>
•o
CJ
in
<x
r->
Q
OH
r-.
CM
r-~
r^
3
f->
3
-o
3
CM
3
t-»k
cr in
o*
CO
o>
o
o*
cm
cy
cm
O
—
O
oo
O
■o
O
rs*
c=
CM
c
<=
o
c
o
c
o
in
CN4
1/1
U1
<»
«n
o
1
I
1
I
i
0/
1
OJ
1
Oi
1
Ol
i
J=
cm
CM
in
m
a
m
JC
r*
ae
CnJ
ae
in
ac
i/-»
IB
»
m
^"
U1
-o
m
-o
k.
-o
-w
-»•
-o
-o
♦
»
o
-*■
-»■
w
-#■
2
in
i
~
in
•
~
m
i
—
m
i
k.
m
i
o
CX
i
o
o.
IT3
1
o
m
i
a
I
£
cm
3
a.
CM
cm
3
CM
ro
3
a.
CM
a.
cm
<§•
ch
2
c§-
cm
1-5
5-
0**
C-6
3
m
<=>
o
S
-o
—
—
o
CM
cm
CM
mr
r*.
in
CM
CM
cm r» o
- - A
ro cm
— r~. cm cm
<» csi cni
cm CM
•M CM
CM CM
s s
CM CM CM CM PO
— o
MT- U"»
CM —
CM CM
CM CM CM CM CM
CM CM O
CM CM
CM r—
CM CM
CM O
CM
CM CM
CM CM CM CM CM
CM CM
CM CM
CM CM CM
s s:
S3?
Cv CD <=>
CM IO
o cm cm o in 9
8 CM S
CM CM
CM O
O CM CM
CM CM CM
CM »
cm evi o in o
m -o S
— — **
<=> CM U-l
« <=> 0> ■= CM
m eo o m
i-> cm cm -»
O CM O CM CM CM
o
o
CM
3
CM CM
S
CM CM
O CM
in
CM CM
CM CM
CM CM a CM
CM CM
CM CM
a> ai
o a.
co in g
5 a
5 5
in
O
r-»
«—»
•n
■— I
CM
<— J
CM
CJ
-o
CJ
o
CM
1
.e
1
x:
1
J=
m
u
CN4
«_*
w
-o
to
•^*
co
^*
co
■*■
^
^*
m
■o
in
-o
in
■o
1
*m
i
--»
i
*j
CM
co
CN*
£
CM
CM
£
s v a
CM «_I CM (_> "W
O- CM CJ CM
2
CJ
CJ
CJ
■=>
u
in
«r
i-O
r-*.
CM
r«~
r-*
3
!— >
3
-o
CM
o» m
cy
aa
cr-
8
cr
CM
CT*
CM
a
—
O
ao
O
c
c
c
c
■=>
c=
■o
*/i
CM
iA
1
1
U1
ir
CM
x:
CM
JZ
m
jr
>n
•
in
CM
CM
-o
a*
»
ifl
^,
in
-o
-a
h
«•
^*
«■
m
i
-a
m
i
mO
m
i
mO
1
~
1
in
i
o
m
%
a
m
i
3
3
=>
CM
CM
s
■^
a.
-™
a_
CM
a_
M
a.
mt
a.
«r
o
CM
k. «♦ k. CM
3 CM 3 r»
oe in oe in
o in o m cj m
a. i a. i «x i
PL CM OL CM Q- CM
co K> c37 ^ co *•■
■Cil
o <=■ —
— — CM
— — « <=>
■a g
S - £
— cm r*»
— CM CM
— cm i->
-m CM CM
CM CM
— CM
» CM
CM CM
o au a.
1M O
5s
ai a*
m >
<• —
•a ai
«3 S
1 a
i
in
m
,_,
r^.
«=>
__
Mr
s
CM
O-l
t-i
-O
CJ
«»
i
1
xr
1
i
t
m
rs»
Ul
r>4
Ul
m
m
in
~o
^
tn
CO
-o
-a
-o
•^■
^*
MT
Mr
m
1
-o
in
•
ID
1
m
1
a
m
i
JO
in
£
rn
(TN*
JS
CM
<r
cm
Q-
—
CD
C>*
l-O
c_)
ro
JE
«r
o u m « n fc.
CM »-
— "CM
u-> <• m
SS^^^
r-
CM
r^
f-*
3
r->
a*
CM
CT>
as
o<
•o
o-
CM
a*
CM
a
G
C
<=
o
«=
O
c
O
i/i
CM
1
CM
CM
j=
m
j=
in
■
m
ae
CM
*/»
^"
XI
Mr
ai
-o
m
-o
l_
-o
MT
mt
mt
o
mt
J3
in
i
-o
m
i
2
m
i
-O
in
i
m
i
a
m
i
IT IN Jt Ul OC Ul
O* 3 C*
rMj a; cn a(N a. i
^ Q_ -*■ O •«• O '
to o m o u-j (_) u->
i « i a i <I i
r* gk c**
cT ^- era ^
C-8
<9 O
'=• ■=>
3 •
HI
<5 \n o «
in r>» m o
-r — go =.
p* «■ o m
ui
S fi 5 S
-o <=■ o
•=> o o.
3 M
UT U-) LTl
CM CM
s s
O CM
O ■=>
8
P-.
£ 2
cm cm
cm cm r».
COini-OCMCMCMCMCMCM
CO <=> —
» m in
-o in
CD -O
CM CM
— CM
o o
O O O CM
i»«. in
s
o <=>
o «
in k.
co in g
CM —
s a
m ■»* <=> c
W> tZ* t-~ t=* — o o- o- -
C-4 U C^ CJ -O CJ — — c
O Oj — o o <
m u cm u cm hj m its m CM
-o en * tn * en ■« -o ~o mt
mf* <»■ **■ «* ■»■ Mr Mr
in-oin-Dinisinuin tn m
I *• I oi i -* i <X i CO t <E I <X
CM ^ CM h. CM LINCtNCLNUCNU
o u in «
CM (Tin cr en
O ■ CM C -^
I .pa | >m I
IO £ (N £ (N
CM
tn o*>n — in— ,m — un
o* cm cr
c o a
x: tn 5
2 5 &
— • wi -—
3 CM
CM
O UI CM
i m i
in as cm
— P CO
CM 3 -~
in o in a in
cm ai cm a. cm a
«•■ a. » cS — o '
3 CM
s §
ai i jy 1
ac cm ae in
«r M3
- «■ • Mr
a in
a. i o. i <x i
CL CM gtN a. IN
o in u in
C-9
uo -o
-« CM PO
w at
o .a
u a
ai s
CM CM
rO o u-]
in m —
O — CDl-OMS-or-ouo
cm — » — m Jo cm —
in r— in cm
o in
o
I ~
m
e o
uo «r
•—} CO PO — MP UO
ms r-i cr^ ms
CD MT MT CM
m — mt
m in m
s -
in ms
CM CM CM CM CM — — O"
— oa ao
in in w
PO CM
CM f>
PO CM
co r— ms cp
• • po «
op p— r- mp r— —
ms i~ •— MS m ♦
CM
cm po
O* tN <2> CM
tfl
l/l o
oi a.
CM CM
po cm —
in
CO
mt ^ in w
CM MS
o po m
o cm in
cm m cp>
m po
CM —
po cm o-
o m o> cm o «?
«» • • • in in
CM CM oo
r— cm oo po cm ^ —
o -
s
25
CO
in
MP
o
3
fl
m
<=»
r-.
e=»
cr
o-
CO
PO
uo
2
CM
<_l
CM
CI
-o
i_l
CM
s
MS
<=>
cs.
<=>
o
O
1
•
1
xz
t
£
1
1
1
1
1
rN»
in
m
cs*
CM
u
m
in
in
CM
CM
•w
MS
MS
en
*»■
Ul
^-
en
MS
MS
-o
MP
*r
MP
^"
♦
u->
m
m
■o
un
-o
in
■a
uo
a
m
m
uo
in
1
«-c
<x
m
i
r»
i
<•
•
CO
i
«x
•
i
tN4
5
CM
<c
CM
MP
CO
CNt
CO
CM
CM
CO
CM
po
<z
u
CM
PO
3e
CM
MP
£
CM
£
MP
CM
w» m ir»
e ex
-c est
ao cr o
m ai m
— u-j — in ^Z ui
••r cj rs
N J N 3 N
w i * a. «
cj m <x fo l_ k_ fc.Ok.oi
cr*C4 er>CN* o — o o oo o cn
CO C O i/ IN h« m— UfO k/. 0>
_ I — i cu i a# t qj i a. i
.cm finiicNft^demiKin
lo -a l -o "*r *•* -o -o
— -*■ a «*■ . **• • -#■ - -** - * u
— - m -*- in o >n o-o o m o m u
-a ) k.1 a. i a- ' a. i a. i «x
3c** a* cm q.(n aCN a. en a cn a.
a_ •*■ £ •** o — • o est ey w o * t/j
o-
CM
u-5
I
rsi
C-10
— 01
O
— o
k. Ol
CP CP
o w.
cS 5
o
Ul
Oi
0>
CJ
c
3
>•
-w
h_
**
a>
^
co
m
.*-*
a.
u>
— — — o>
— >. ■
=3
in
U7 CD
r»* ao •■
» 2 2
cvt
in
in
ao ~o a<
■» — in a 4
OB « Oi or-
— O O «J —
I b- I
in <x r-i
Csl
*■ ^ »
en in tn m en m tn
Sn a: n oc n *
— <i m «x *-"•
m
in
in
• — i . C>4
u-)<C(^*«xrv*«xu-l<xu-l
2 ~
f-*
o to
3 S
cm ■»
cm
O «X CM
1 1
i
1 c_ ) 1
o to
cm
tO CM
— * a
"■ t^ a r-.
S-o <i o m — * t -o <r C' i rst
•• u o oe in oe •« > o oc o
U-> — «>< On. 3 U-l — . u-3
v">
to
SIN U N U (N
* O " U M
cj cm cj ex
u « u *
a V a .
o cm x cm x cm
cj — cj CM c_) <*■
m — to -*-' tO ■*-« tO -«w tO cv tO
t 9 I 1A_ I Cw » K I Q_ I
o-» en r^ <x r--j <x o* cm ^
C-ll
— o
O
uimuimcnincntn
s ^
s
-a
cm
-a
in
9- UD
CM
u-» . —
cm r»-
3 ~
-0 <X w> *• — *» -o
— U O dC iN * —
ii-)<xc^«tc>i<rin<Eu-5
3
mum
^ r^i x c* so* so* 3Csi s rN ui (s _
UCNU«U*^U(Nunu«3K>(/)
<r t l*. i u- i
— r* « rsi
~ as w
i a- i a. ' < *
rsi » csi +* est «j cs»
— to r^i to ho ui — trt cn
u-i — i/i
-*-« rsi «rf r*
tn m w *
C-12
CM CM -O
CM
CM CM
lf> CM
— m m
m -o m
■— -o
•» CM
m in
cm cm —
S a.
» CM
CM CM
<r
IP
o
a
-•—
171
>■
o
c
a.
o
•
a.
o
IP
<->
l/>
Mr Mr in
■» in
S o w
^ Ml Ul
s
uimuiincnmtnm
JS
$ s
ce cn ac r-4 ar
M
ao
a
at
cr
CO
m
I->
MT
ac
-o
-o
in
ao
rM
o-
CD
2
CM
o-
in
CM
or
o>
•*•
~*
O
*-<
~^
•*
•o
MM
».
in
CM
CM
1/1
m
£
CM
CM
in
«J
CM
-o
mt
-a
-o
MT
MT
-o
mt
Mr
"»■
*r
Mr
MT
in
m
m
in
in
m
m
^
m
m
m
I
<X
•
<r
i
<x
t
«x
I
m
i
I
•X
•
i
cm
t_J
CM
<-i
rM
c_J
rn
t_j
o
CM
CM
CM
3
CM
Mr
C_l
■M
i_>
CM
c_>
CJ
MT
<— >
— ~
C-J
CM
£_>
MT
c_>
■*•
m . —
•* cm r».
.cm o —
— O O CM
l/»
in cm
.— . MX -43 <X O tl ■■■ *• M3
<• CM « r^
i <=• ac o
CM
a 4 N
i i * i ■ i ■ » ■ ~^ i »
in cm .cm .in — 2-3S >S _S
«-* in *»< in *■. m
in
^ in ^ in i* in in
— . i — . i <x i u» ' u-
CM 3 CM SCMtnCM4XCM«XCM
CMcjr^c-jMramroirt'— crtrt
in .c in
a. «r> a. in
in
m
(B •. (Q n (fi n to
C-13
ai at
c a.
01
LJ
O
-O lit k.
— 1/1 —
> oi fib
i_ a. o
s s
-r 2 S
o» ep o
.m • —
u-l «x r^t « r>* «x
2 ~
o-
Ol
u«
m
O
m
r-*.
•
-o
r-*
<+
*
r»».
-O
<x
o
*»
V
-O
ac
o
-»
CM
o
« c*
CJ
CJ
o
«3C
C-J
QC
^*
i
lC
o
t
CJ 1
CNI
a
1
CM
•
ui
CNI
rsi
3
m
u-J
^ 3 ^ *• -O 3 -O
mum
tn*Jtn*/in^m*jinu.ui
tn .e in .e m
in il m (l m
3 i — . t — " — i —
ICN 3fM 3N 3(N 3(N(flN«N«N M "* ££-*±r*-*±£ZfZ£X"Z£l
C-14
in o-
at ->•
k. ■
<c ~~
at •>
** u w
wi c a.
a, a,
— * -■•
.o -a
3 3
g
"2
U_ U- <X U-
«r 3 5 «
O CN(
s
2: 22 g
o-
co co ta r is o
_
in
CM
tv«
• o- -in .— -ex
Q
tnintninuimuitri
m ■ in u m
s
s a
no «
^ ex 3 ex 3 ex a
in
a*
at
t/»
r-.
a/
o*
o-
ai
**
«
•o
(-n
r-—
r-*
<=>
m
rsi
«
-o
m
r-.
<m
m
r**.
OH
©
<x
-o
S 2
*•
<*
-o
ac
■-s
'W
CN*
Cs*
o
«r
OJ
(_i
—
ac
r^
ae
™«
i
O
ae
o
1
t
i
i
r>i
*n
CM
c%*
• m
fs*
3
m
m
-o
^~
— -o
3
*•
3
r«
-a
3
-a
^"
■M <W
<■»
^*
**
a.
-«
m
m
.c
u-a
£
in
.e m
a.
tn
a.
in
in
a.
in
U-
•
u_
1
a_
i
i
a. i
i
i
i
l
r*
r*
r*
-4-*
■*->
r^
•—
r*
t/3
-^
en
l-O
CD
CO
CM
ce *■■*
tn
-*
en
o*
en
t-o
en
^
C-15
s s
2 a
O l_
§ S
o« —
s s
in
cm
-o ai
in oc -o
IS » (O o —
— .CM
CM I**
O CM
u-3 a# a*
o in cm ~ • "° 2 ^
cm o> <x -o <x -^ fli «■• S ■*■
i S i i i i i i i
m cm .01 • 10 — . cm .— cm
cnirscntrainmcnm
in^in^ui^mvinu.^
3
t_J ITS *-* ITS 4-> U^ w U"5 *-•
ir>
10
UN UIOU «
- ONU
5 3 2
3 IN 3 C* 3 N Ol CN « fN
C-16
— -o
•o XT
— in <=> in o -o
» ex o ex m ex
— • «n r*. er- co 01
ex —
CN» CM
10 :°. "P ° ir> •=»
ex o
So in
m ex
U-J ^- ~0
10 m »o
0
r*
0
m
in
^
c>*
^^
s
s
o oi
cn* r*
8
C>* r*
0
in
m
u-l
oa
ex
in
r^
r—
o in in
ex o o
in t—
xr xr
►o ex
ex ex
» ex ex
ex ex ex
8-
<=> o> o- o o o o
— - O. O O O — —
O m in co
in o
s
in r-.
o o
— ai
» m xr
ex o
co ex
ex o
O Ol
cn u-
s
♦ 2 3?
2 2°.
a: m ac n a
O- CO
uo ■=> — ■
m - — . cs4
C*
k ex
in
ex
1 cJ 1
in ex
Sex cj ex
» u -
in in ■ in u in
•x 1 <r m 1 <r 1
U (N U (N O (N Z M
in<*rfin^rfin^rfin<*^in
u m «j in *« in «
3E ex a ex a ex a .
U*U«UNUK)U*1
m
&
Ol
ui
r— .
cv
ct~
I*
un
•
O
LP
r-x.
*
xO
r*~
■*
rsi
«
r**.
0
*%
**
-0
OC
•0
«
OxJ
at
rx
I3C
-"
1
<=>
oe
O
m
.
rs*
J-
t-xj
3
u-t
J _
u-i
-0
3
^I
3
^
-a
3
-0
^,
<•
•
e«
J#
a-
*•
<«
*•
♦- m it in m to
~CNai(N«eN«CN
" c/i -* in p^>
m xC m
I O. I I 1 • I I
C-17
■■M^BMHI
o <=>
cm <->
o <=>
— — cm cm
o » o
CM <S>
CM OB
cm cm
CM IO
CM CM
•o <=
o. at o
-w t-i a.
I >
C i-
o cu
M at
— cv
m m» h.
~ O CL
— cu
•m cl
e *-
o — •
3 O w
a cm
M- «X
a. cu
s s
0. CD O
^— ^^ <o
-o
cu
O-
to
in
CE
•a
-o
ut
CM
o»
u->
CM
o
*-»
^^
*•*
<=>
—
- «° £
i/t
Lfl
— • O*
s <^
cni — - <x ~o <x o -• — ti -o ac — ■ t» c^j
octMu-uOJttNa- i <o ac o>
I cj i i
u-j — cmi — c^mi s in p-i m
-o at
uimminuitninm m tn *n
h- iHi»»ii"t4ia3ia]iC.
■ uiginuin^m^tn.cyin4rfinu.m m u-3j=lo^zuoj=u-io_u^culo in a. in
• ■ «x i <r < — i — i— .i — .i«xiu_'LL_ta_i^-ia_« ■ < • i >
cni ■*■ i-^ *- r^i — ' c^ ^- r-M) *- cmj
C-18
m
o
m
in
o
O
CM » —
o
CM
m
in
o
r^.
O
*r
o
ITS
□0
**>
K>
O
K>
-a
r—
K>
ao
CM
CM
■ —
CM
o
-O
r*
o
f-.
-o
ao
r^
i->
ro
r^
CO
in
—
<=
eo
CM
CM
cm
<s>
•o
♦
o
3
-a
CD
c5
ms
■=>
^
in
CM CM
cm
<=>
in
CM
R
m cd —
CM CM
o in
in r*.
— ao
as a»
•w in
— CM
in
g
« m» in
o MS o
K> CM l-S
cm r^> r—
o r-»
CM CM
in o
» o
o — <
(-> o
ai *->
CT> 1/1
■o a
o ■=> i-~
o o-
ms in
i-s «
in ao
cm o !•*> ^ ^ cs
O — K> CM — -
— CM
in — t«- cm f» in cm
<Z> CM <=>
s s
a cm
-^ <r
a* a*
u* >
-« —
*• at
—i ■•■ »
2 3
g
2: 2 g
cninmincnmintn
^ s
rs* ac cs*
«A
3B
3B
s»
■m
f">
MS
ai
ts-
CO
CO
LO
o-
UD
o
%
in
ac
-o
MS
m
as
as
-a
CSI
CM
CJ*
in
CM
o*
m
CM
<o
rs»
i
—
1
i
1
"3
■""
— "
i
-"•
I
i
o
Cs*
<2>
m
<T
cs*
CM
m
<r
CM
«r
CM
«x
in
<r
m
ul
u-i
MS
^~
^
MS
^*
MS
MS
-o
-o
^
^"
^«
m
3
u-J
3
m
C-J
<n
-~
m
■w
m
*-
m
•A-*
m
ft
un
u-i
u-)
i
<z
l
I
i
1
1
CM
a
r-<
^
CM
■c
C-M
3
CM
3
CM
3
CM
3
CM
cn
rs»
<x
rsi
<r
Cs«
M>
c_>
~*
<_ >
c_l
Ml
<->
*~
<->
1—1
I— >
^
r-^
CO
<**
Wi
l-o
O « CM
(_J I
CM
2 2 3 g
ac cni oe — • t <-^
3 in -* m
ir»
u~3 a.
Cs* >*W Cs| +4 CM Mtarf Cs*
IT)
IN
C-19
— CM
» in
«•■ in
a j=
O — -O r-~ -O -O r».
m » ex in » »
in » m i-o
3
o> —
8 S
m —
— IT
cm cm cm cm
m
O
tn
» m
» m r»>
CM CM CM
«r » in r— «r
m
m
in
tO CM
to —
Q
m
•» » mt Mr m r»
cm cm cm in CM MT
— cm in c
r» w» —
m r»
s
CM CM
10 rx
-a et
— 4T> — —
— CM
O CM
m> <r
Oj o>
»» —
CO — ^
u
<« at
♦J "M
2 3
Co -O
rt ^ — in
o- CO ■=> C%4
uimuiincninu)in
UO t_) LT3
• <T- • lrt • — •
C_J l/l -— • ITI -w ID m— LO *-
c£r><aer4a:r<ta:(Nur4u(Nur4ur<i a cn i n i w P <*■• => £*
-o
CM
t-~
o
in
CM
S
CM
e
o
CM
O
<x
C~J
1
i
1
C_]
m
in
CM
in
CM
-o
-o
-o
^
^*
m
i
<x
in
i
u.
m
I
in
I
a.
in
•
cm
en
C-M
«r
CM
<x
CM
CM
M*
»
ro
en
-~
en
n
to
-^
CN4 -tNOirv-flrNjgr-
-a <e — '■o — ■ ■■» -o ar -~> n r-
«- u o ae m ae -« i -o oc o
i i i i i i — i i i
o* .m-4M^CN sin — u-
» — -O 3 «T => ^" ^ -O 3 -C
rtncina.ina.in
m a. u~
C-20
a.
n
•5 -
• S
5 35
Si
s
I
w
am
5 *S m
W »- tA
5a
- i
24
in a ui o in n
a m S in 8 m
3 i 3 ■ 3 ■ S ■ — < ei e i ei m >
* — lN«n€*B«««iaNanN4
S 8 3 -2 a ■ R
C-21
8 S
rx o.
i
i
S *
8" *
S
s x
S *
r
*3
S t
■» —
2S
2 a s SissKssaisS
o — S O <* n oi — B b
A A J, iXu,^Sc!4ScV.8l8l
a : 3 : k i.° s s :: s: ii 13
u <n u in u «o yin •o in o> m 0> <r> *• in w 10
ai o
3
I
s
i
* r
53
Is
■*■* a.
!
3 *"
S
o.
3
5 2.
/> —
w s
* s -
S • 9
IS
53
3 $
3 «
— in 5 R«*<p£S>~>333o3c»
o — 8 o ■% £5 cm — 3 o
S«yl?y«y1o2« o.«r, ?ln -A g.,n
C-23
-A
- I
J! *
S S
3
S
i
£
m
k.
i
-8
1
<•
5
■s
I
• k
« £
x r k
•* Ml
s s
• ?
w *
III
*3
3 S
2 2 S
? "* •
MOUini/IBMOWN
« r** c* — o o
y?S7g?g?2>r> |H 3.7 o-S ».X
C-24
£
S*
e
J
1
7
a
7 2.
S
•i s
i s
a-
s
a £
— a.
|
£
3
S S
s *
5a
<-> => OB
OB •*■< — S«<»30-=i» = S=)2
o — <5 o •« e* C« — <5 o
r-4 cm m in cmqcmSoiBotBmi
3:3:2555 S3 ; z- S3 95 93
umcjwtuu-ium'om o> m c»> «■» ■• in »• A
3 1 3 > 3 1 S 1 — . > si ei m > ci
C-Z5
a «■
in u-
U1
a>
**
km
<«
a-
I*
* g
S £
O k-
5
o< c
LP a/
S 2 S
as
evi
un
<=>
r*
c-ni
«x
^
<x
<z
<x
^*
<_)
\n
i—i
IT)
=3
1
C_)
rsi
O-l
<z
—
<E
r*i
u->
n v o ui n u a
I CD I CI C
io cm a cm o cm
» 3 0 3 N 3 rs
a Ul O
CO CSI
O u-1 O u-5
S-0«;< C«J • ■» ■ ■» ■ -a • -o
» « » f • i» » ••«• «■ » <* »
u m u m -o in tr» in cr u-3 cy u~> o<in
i =D i — . i c i ei ci ei
M U CN O CM »» CS *WC^4 *w C* <« CM
C-26
<a tfi
— <n
0J
in
— ex
m
CNi
U l/«
-— OI
s
i
i
ex
o
1
in
i
in
IB
ex
t
ex
§
l
o
i
C-4
e i
o in
§
i
in
=1
in
in
I-J
in
l
=3
in
i
2
m
t
*n
1
in
1
C 1
C7<
m
i
<r
—
<x
CX
«x
K>
<r
»
to
—
en
—
tn
(-NI
en K>
tn
«•■
i C-27
CM CM — —
»» CM
en o
o
a -w
53
« ai
ao
CM
_
in a, »
in
s
CM *J O
o
a <• cm
i
i
1
1 LO 1
cm
CM
m
ID CM
S.M g
ao ^ cni _
a tn o en cn
5 ir>
C-28
0>o-*CMr-*>^in-or-.
»inmmminininm
i- t
a a
u ■
2. K
m o-M-m*omc»-aoc*--o
ol <3inrocpcMOOBCM —
in
u
1/1 C3
-a ^ ^ _. _. -_
C *j o- ~o ^ C* cm CM CM cm cm
3 in cm — • ^ r*»
bk. a co
"o
e
° in e» in in r- cm CM
1i a. g* » -o cm r» o» — ao cr-
3 W CMin»-OK> — CM — —
o a
MM -o
— . m
<t —
^ cm — . ao — cm -m- t>- ao ao
m ... in * • in
■a o •» » -o ►-> -o
■I ou in ki cm -o in
u
at «c>OO*OMrror~r~-0
w h. • • ♦ • •
OI ci. O ■" MB M9
.£ in -o «• m
a
r*
— CMCMincM«r—ooco
in »* «t> -o • •
o cm K>
a.
in
at
S
^_ a* en m- ^- — > -s> ct- m -o <^
i_ a. r^»inGoc>»inin-»
ai r*» go r-- CD ^ ^ <&m
in
a
M
-^ CMO*CMO*CMI^-~CMCM
1/1 .... ....
O CM f» O — • K> f~ M GO
-oca. cm — cm — • » ro w i-»
E
■o
c
3
u.
<u cM-o-oe»--or~.^i~«'
a. ■-•
^j ooooocmcmcmcm
in
a
*d
u
S
b
-oai cs-ooc^c-ooom
C fc. •" cm -^ CD
— a. r— K> « -o
m K» t*» n
■g
u
— CMf^CMCMOCMCMCMCM
in r- m
a u-> f~
o. in in
m •—
m
u ai -oaom-oo'O'Oinm
Oh- CMI^OrOIOMrO-r"-.^
O* rO CM ►"> O* r*» fO in GO
in
m
u
— CMOCMCMOCMCMCMCM
in ro in
a ~o »
a. cm er-
in in
ai
Im
— . a* inooooomoinin
<»w i-o f> or- co =2 r2 2" :?
cm cm oo o r-. r>» .« r>»
xs k» in cm »
in
u
■w m
u o
ai a-
■O
e
53
CM
«
in
m
s
CM
CM
in
in
a
<x
-o
1
-o
M*
<r
<z
C_J
in
1
y
in
i
=3
in
I
cm
CM
c_>
CM
«X
CM
<x
K)
<X
M>
0;»303CD3IN3rs
«<'3cnrotnaacn9cncM
•a cm cm — o o
co i = i c i e i e i
cm ocm ocm o in o in
» <i »• «x m- <x ■» oiv
•om cj«in crm o»in o*in r* OQ
— . i ei c=i ci ei I, £j
OCM *«CM »«CM *WCM mCM ^*
.2 z
•m l/l
— O
u ex
t- in
a> a
l/l oi >
m Op k.
— >- a.
<_> •— en
« <i <r cr- o- —
m — • •«- -o a> o a* — " o- ao — ~o
_-j*ct*— ^^oj=-oj==> o* m o c*
— cc^c — *-■— • -w o ~* ~* o O
*» I — I — 1 I I I I I t
Qic*4acM«r<4cr*eu-i c^ r* to to
k_ » k_ » L. » — "^— -O » ■» •« -O
<x » a » o ■»- ♦ » » ■•■ ■» •»
>-l h. I k.1— il — lLI.IU.ILt.lli.1 L." 'JVJ
o
m
CM
at S
at —
*-- -~
e -•
11 ■_■
& 5
_icfcr— ct-Ojz-ojt-o o> in
— c Cx B » " -*J •"• *■* o ■■■ ~*
ex
I — I I
ex ■ ex e ex
in x- in
■ k. i
rs at ex .**
— o_ r^* u» CN
in
— ex — r^t cj r^i
U.N it n o -
c-« t_j
» C-31
a o
i/> a.
— CM l">
CM CM CM
I
s
§ t
a* o wn
■^ til U1
a w *»
w Oj —
a- a. cj
a* *j ■—
JO- »- 0>-0£-^£0 O- IT) O
c=
Ol
<=
■— -
1
•
CNJ
m
C^i
fe
O
^>
^»
-*.
\n
*^
tf*>
w
1
k_
aj
r>-*
ai
cm
CL.
—
a.
cm
s cm e in
■ mam m ir> m m /"^_ T y
_i_-iu.iu.iu.iu-' V_ J 4.
-««CM»»CMC_)CMC->CMUCMUCM
■■■■■WIH
■■■I
■§
> «i a
•- a. o
S >- S
at ►— a-
— e c^ e — *■« -~
ai *— o- ao
-co <y ui
s
s
•
—
i
—
I
r^
m
rsi
rsi
-*■
fc
^~
^p
^-
o
*■
in
\
**-
in
i
k-
in
i
C-*
a/
r-4
Oj
(X
~"
a-
•■•
a.
CM
■ r*4 c irt
» 3 » o » •» » » •» »• •* /"^ O O
in .— in — in • m ■ m m u-> io w> L— J J
U. CNi U.
— o
-*■* a.
o a>
to -^
>- ai o
o I l/l
a. — a.
—
e csi
C —
<^l
• Cn<
• CNI
2: s s
o- c in
ir> ^*- w~i -»- in w in v irJ ui un in in
» fa. I fa- I — 1 I— • I Lfa. I U. I Lfa. I U_ I ^ — *5 A
— «^— o.niTwu!mu- • U ON U M U * *^
a, Oi
c i_
a a.
at 3
a. o-
o a
m Lk.
o —
■_ in
at o
ifl 8 L.
oj i_i a.
a> — x>
i— — o
O u
• ai
a k. Ol
^ 5
-a Oi c
3 ui at
in 3 m
cf-ct— CT--o-c~ojro cr in
CM
5 CV4
4_ I
at cm
c cm c in
— in
W I
Of CM
a- cm
■ u-> ■ in in m m m ^-i -5 r
— 1— • I U- > U- I U. I Ll- I L~ J J
>* in k.
<_j — ■>-
i > i/i
e u a
•3 3?
** to a
ex -o
-» ~« CM
CM CM
s
CM CM CM CM CM CM
s
IM
■ -* a<
> 3
OJ OJ
en oc
1 s
£ ex
s
^ o>- o-o r -o £ o o- in O
— e <*-*<= — — — *-<o ~ ~ O
cm cm in in
*-«Vfc_^-— ^r— -^j ^ -•■ -o -o
o <•• o -w ^ <♦ ♦ ^ m ^
■*»r>M.in «m fin in in m m /^ O £"
aits ur<4'M(S-ir4U(Nur4UNu(N **
t. o
5 3
S
s
in *-
— 1/1
x a
Oi a.
—
C 04
e —
■M 1
CN4
• rsi
• CN*
<z> a. — cr- m —
"* ■c S — — 2
» i_ «r v «•" — * ■"• -o » ^- -o -a __
» o » o ♦ » » » » «r » /^_ O ^
in — j-i — m «t m • m in in in in V_ ~ • j /
I i^ I i»l — I — iu-iu-iu_iu-i
» m
3
— •
a «•
a
f>» en r»
r> 3 K
^ » in •* —
s s
r s
K>
in
m
CM
as
s
s
cm
CM
in
-o
in
—
o
•r
K 3
— ex •
ajMg
aVl
trt
*»■
r-*
-—
&»
■jM
r*
o*
cr-
in
C<*
r>.
•^
C*
*>*
— crr^e — w — -wO —• — * O
s
a*
■—
>-
L_
CJ
CJ
■
<x
<C
»•
^p
-o
(V
o
at
— i
tt*
CT»
w
o»
-o
<c
-o
JZ
C
O*
c
■*->
-«-»
**
1
1
1
•
Of
r*i
•
C%l
a
r*.
c
r-4
e
£
n
^
■w
o
•w
■*•
u-s
*^
in
*^-
\n
•>
U"5
M
>*
l
i
w
1
*o
rs*
a>
CN4
QJ
c-*.
c»
OD
■■•
Q-
^-*
a.
CN«
u.
Cs*
u-
C-38
o o
S £
*» 4-1
ft- 01
a* an
O k.
<u m
— i/t
— a
a, q.
S 5
u ■ u>
-s-i
a in «
c =s
MAMA
A tO S CM
o cm o cm a cm
CM
wn — — ir>
k.r»k.cMk.cM -a -co- oo to o cm
4-410I0---0-- — • — • o o>
>- < >- 1 >- 1 tu t a* 1 1 1 1
acMsinaea-ocM'Qm.scM cm cm in in
u. Mr i_ -o 1/1
Oj M~ <U M- —
in in in -^ m -^ in e in in m in in
I — I — T CI CI k- I C_> I C_) I C-l ' <->
«r ocm o n oicm 11 n ocMACMaa-oaa-oco
iN>K)>«a.iNa.K)uxa«4iN«r)«
3SM»^Mr^Mr5Mr.jMr_jMr_jMr.jMraiMraiMr— mt mt mt mt mt
C-39
a. A
j=. a>
— ■ k.
o a.
o
ex
a
k.
-— a<
rsi
'■^
^
s^
LO
CO
tO
r>i
i_>
— CJ
CM
(—1
CO
t/l
in
•=>
i/»
CVi
r-
■■=>
tvl
k-
C*
k_
r~.
r*
rx
c
— G
o
c
o
a,
r>*
a>
—
Hi
<=>
jao-4j3r^j3U-i_ou-i x rw b m sun
CW O C* O CM
— - o e irt ■++ er> o
tAOOli.inu.0 l/IN Irt — — U-)
h- r^ -a — c cr- c» in o c-ni
ai«o — — — <=. — — . — ** «5 o
>» i ai i ai i i i i i
xaD-or-s.T3u-ij=rv» cm Cni u-j 40
"0-oita^^-o»/»^ ^ *r -o -o
— * *•* a; •*• d* ^- — » •» ■•»• w ••»-
10 -^ m •— » in c m ui in m u">
— 1 ci ei •. 1 cj 1 c_> 1 t_> 1 u 1
C-4C
U» o
+-> Ok
Ml
(A O
— - O.
tit
•• k. tit
■ Oj O
■ ■ o
en at Lk.
OMDf-->mor- O0« <=> -O O-
■ ■ • O* • • • CM •••
CM CM CM - ^ CM CM M «■ —
CM CM CM
CM CM
rsi cm
cmcmcmo-^*^^**
s
CM «^
CO CO CO — CD — *
CJCMC_»~-^C_)CMC_jaO *f> *—
CM f^ O CM L- CM
co c — c <=> eO a* cm
*» I *» I »» » *■ L ft* J
o cm a cm a cm a
k_
£
k.
o
!5
C
c
•■*-
—
"•"
—
3
O
3
O
in
-*-"
CM
CO
o
^
in
<S*
ao
i-w
m
<z>
l/t
r^
m
in
r-
k.
CM
k.
CM
-O
O*
as
in
o
c*(
i
at
1
Of
\
"eu
1
Of
i
1
1
<=>
CM
m
m
*
ao
■o
CM
*o
m
CM
CM
CM
*n
lO
it
-o
<*
-o
u.
■*■
k..
-o
in
^~
-o
-o
-j
-*■
♦
OJ
^
a>
«■
or
-*■
«■
ITS
1
_
in
i
m
l
— >
■=
m
1
c
m
i
c
in
i
CJ
m
1
in
i
C_J
in
i
1-3
1
a
CM
o
CM
Oi
CM
a»
CM
o
CM
CD
CM
-o
aa
s
IS
rs«
>
>
*
a_
CM
a-
!*•*>
I— I
—
<X
—
<x
CM
«X
<I
"•
r-ai
o — —
— — • o
m w ai
m at
— • aj .*-<
u s in
£
S
to
I_> C-M
in
u ^ u cm u aa ^ — */» o i/< — to oo
3
o
m — — •
r--* _Q m _o m SCSI B (N »m »
^ ^.-o ^.-o *w^ *w^ *»-o *v -o
♦ =s •*■ = ^ _ 1<! J9 J* Jt
*» -o k. ^ k.
t>< or^-p^-P6*^^
o r>< o r<4
<U
•V
Oj
v
_
♦
♦
•— t
tn
— *
u-i
e
in
in
e
i
c
I
k-
i
t_j i
Of
c**
a>
r*
o
r^
cb ch
CD
o
in
s
r>i
o
in
in
-o
-o
^*
ir>
u->
I u
1
~o OB
C*s|
o cm t—
r~i en — .
oa cm m ir>
r-* o- r*. ^.
cm r>i -O o»
£
-a •=■
k> 10 m
cm cm r».
— cm r-»
CM CM
s
3 >
s
s
CM CM
e ui
o a
fe k
s
CX CM
8-
o in *4
r*
r-.
s
CV(
k-
CH
b_
r-
e%»
c
<=>
Oi
Cs*
Oi
I
^
I
*fl
1
*9
I
>-
1
:»*-
l
rsi
O-t
in
.0
kO
X
CNI
B
rsi
^~
&
•*■
-o
&
-o
1
^
3
IT)
1
IT)
1
in
i
in
l
1
m
r^i
o
r^i
O
r*
O
r^i
a
Cni
O
k. t*- k. CM
-o - c «■ as in g
a u-> a co
«r o cm
mmmmmmtMmmmmmmi
k.
CM
-o
M
c
a-
di
o
«>
>-
i
at
1
Ol
1
i
a
CO
04
-o
in
j=
cm
*v
-o
k.
«r
k.
-o
u>
Oj
at
♦
in
I
— i
c
in
I
m
I
m
1
a
c*
OJ
cm
at
cm
a
cm
CD (N a <o
~o m r-
■■■■■■■i
rsa o
4t
o at
m t-
<=> ex
o <=> r^ r-.
a t
r« r»>
m r»»
X O
cm to »
ID r-5 »
c-J — -«
- CO o
ao — en —
^NdNdtnjoin xcm scm am
m -a in £ n
m
CM
<=>
i
m
or* O CM o cm o ^ O CM
m
i
cm
— » m -^
m c in in in in in
cm otNffiNa-ooi^oN
ojcmocmcbcmcd-ocq-ocscm ^ * j
■
to
s
m
s
s
<=
8
s
O
s
r*4
rC
«r
gj
fo
•=>
u->
r-»
*^
ro
-o
O
»■
m
r<
^
in
K>
»
OD
— • m
n h n
r». r»>. go
ao m m
Csl
CM
m
«
— o
•« a.
vn
& 5
— o« —
in —
o
a
o
o
3
e
3
CO
CO
CO
CO
O
iO
L_>
rs*
t-»
C_3
CN*
C_)
GO
to
i/i
o
LO
trt
CO
lO
o
ox
r-
<=>
rsj
L-
CX
h_
r-»
t-.
rx
t_
rx
-o
C
OJ
e=
•o
o
at
ex
&
Oi
o
Oi
o
o
*■
i
*9
1
^
1
»»
i
>-
1
>-
1
>-
i
jO
r^4
-o
OX
-a
in
-O
to
X
rx
s
rx
■
to
»
-a
ex
to
k»
^
w-
k_
-o
t-
>v
*w
^-
•»
-o
-o
-o
-=
•*■
=3
"=>
rs
^
-J
_J
■^*
to
LO
in
in
to
to
lO
to
to
■^
to
1
1
o
rx
O
rx
o
rx
o
ex
o
rx
a
^
o
rx
a
rx
OJ
rs*
a/
rx
:>
•*
»
z>
=>
w
I>
•■■
r>
ex
=>
f-O
z>
^
Ct-
ex
a_
r—»
lA n Irt — — IO
CO- CO LO <z> ex
C tO tO tO ITS
t_ I CJ I C_) I C_) I CJ
SC-45
v m
2
m m cm
e> cm in
cmcmcmcmcocmo-cmcmcm
OB **» — •
w in in
cm cm
•w-CT-o-tvir^aa — >-->aoco-OCT-r>.CT-ir>
corocMc^i-o^^rr^cMincncjo — mcM
cm cm cm
<=.«»• -o -o — ■»-r»-ooo-=cr-ao-«rr-.
^ r^ -o o -a in —
— » ««• in « » —
cmcmcmcmcmoo^cmcmcmcmcmcmcmcm
o » <•
f> cm cm
-o-»»CMCMcoe»--»r— CM»CMenr~.m
— r-«cxr-><=VaD-dr-^V — in o ex -«r
_. — — — tor^ — — — — r^i ex —
in in iff in
-^j -*-* -^* -^
•2 « « «
k. k W l» • ■
a o e o c a
3 3 • CM
o in 4J aa o
urMU-unun ui«* gio tf«* tnasikiniLO tfiN in — — in
CM r~ O CM^CM^.r-.^CMk_CM -o — e cr* ao in <3 CM
<=-^e— c-oeoa^r^a* — a* o> a* <o — — • — <o — — — — o> o
>«ifwi'«i'«i>-i>~i>~i>.iajia4i i I I i i
.acM.acM.ain.ainacMscMBinaaa'acM'ain.ccM cm cm in in
ZDM-:iD^-r=>^-=>-*-_j^'_j^- j-^^i^-aj-^-ai^'—'*- m* ^* •*• ■*■
m in in m m m m in->in-^mcm in in in in
— . I — I— .1— .1 — , i _ i — . — i c i e) k. I CJ I CJ I CJ I U I
ocm ocm qcm ocm ocm o «•- ocm ocm ai cn ojcm QCMcncMOQ-OA-oaQcM
C-46
§
Ol — -"
g %
— Oj u
■/> i- —
l/» 3 >
"» -— >-
— ^ a*
<_> :z en
s *
Uj (N ^ QO 4->
©cm o m *-» cm *rf
_ «*- -*. -O w ■«"
■*- ^ <x ■»
m in in ira m
*-
rx
O
in
<J\
o
CM
t
■o
1
ir>
LU
CM
LU
rx
±
-o
^
w
^
^"
in
■W
>r>
-*-•
ir>
Ol
I
i
i
-c
cm
3
(N
3
CM
*►
t_J
^i
c_>
r-i
•• ^ O (J N u o
I I I
cm in M m cm
— U CM
ITS O. CM Cv CM O. U-^ —
lO -*CM MM CM *rf
-O CJ^ L_J ^" CO
in tb in aiu^u_^~5u_u^u-u~i
£ S 5 2 £
m in >* m cm
CM >- CM m CM *CM
CM M «•" A. <■"
c un -o m
— i c i
X CM CM CM
-* »— CM
C-47
m — —
s
— « c«
in
i
m
— CM -"
Of
Of
o-
a
o
IX
m
P*»
in
i/i
<X
*n
t-j
t_>
cr-
a*
-o
O
CO
ex
«W
CO
•*--
cx
•O
in
j=
ex
a
o
i/»
u>
<o
<X
-»-*
<^
CI
(X
n
1
1
1
1
-a
i
i
1
o
in
J— '
r>i
-*-"
m
UJ
CX
UJ
ex
c
in
1/1
(X
•^
-o
k.
^-
w.
~o
^~
"W
■•»«
~a
«
*
l/l
m
l/l
in
in
in
■*■>
m
-*—
m
«
in
Oi
m
I
■+J
i
OJ
0J
i
l
UI
i
£
5
ex
J=
fX
j=
ex
3
ix
3
ex
ex
3
<x
^
-~
►—
■w
C_l
wm
C_J
ex
u.
■*
E
~^
■*-*
£
o
2
S
m
o
«x
f")
«x
«->
o-
»
■»
rx
ao
o-
<=>
«
«3
<r
<r
-o
«» r»
i/<
<»
1^
o-
<u
o
&
&
r*
5
CM
t_j
O
C_J
<_)
ex
*- CN
a>
rvi
a>
-o
c*
<=>
o>
■=>
o>
CM
CVl
o
J= <=>
Ol
o
•
i
i
1
•*■<
1
*-»
-**
I
CT 1
.*-»
1
-*j
1
CX
CM
m
m
a.
CN»
•a.
CM
a.
m
— in
CM
INI
O*
*?
s
"
<=
-o
c
-o
^
aj
*
ai
-o
>» in
(->
•*
t_i
^
en
**
m
u.
m
LL.
m
in
m
m
m
e
vn
B
m
-a
in
i
i
I
I
<_)
i
i_>
i
(_)
I
m i
I
i
i
tx
>-
S
>-
r-i
r-i
r-»
^>
c--*
■»-
t-i
— r<
■
r-4
■
r-i
rsj
c-x
ex
ar
2C
C-48
01
u
a m
III
— CM
CM ~»
— r<4
— CM —
UJ CM
l/l ■•»- <-J —
*ri as •*■* cm
fc_ CM k_ CM J=
■O
1/1
-C
CM
o
•^
a
—
cS
^m
cS
CM
cS
CM
C_9
o
CJ — ■
•
CM
*
-*-•
o
CJ
CM
c_>
«
o»
o>
<o
CM
CM
■a
1
-o
t
1
i
*^
i
1
1
1
UJ
CM
UJ
CM
u->
%ft
CM
«n
CM
CM
ITS
u-»
CM
a. cm
••V
^~
-a
«*"
a
^"
-O
c
-o
Oj
0/ ■*■
^>
■*•
3
«*•
3
^*
-o
■o
■^
«=»
■*•
£=> ■»
W>
■*-*
u-»
■
iO
(U
lO
Of
*r>
U-
u-i
»n
in
u-a
IT)
1
1
1
^>
1
i/»
i
1
•
C_J
1
t-J 1
3
CM
3
CM
CM
3
CM
3
CM
CM
CM
CM
>-
CM
»- CM
UJ
^*
(_J
CM
u.
■*"
•— '
■r
CM
hm
CM
!■■
ro
*K
*■
X
~*»
X CM
— • U CM
S. 2 2 J=
^ *• CM
-*- CM OtCM CU -O -E CM
.C O — CM — — t— O
u-i cm cr u-> -o un
i — . i — i e i
CM *CM M CM CM CM
♦ ¥— — •— CM -*- —
C-49
<S Z
U K U
eX CM
ex ex
01
k. at
u> 3 k.
— tx ex rx — — — .
Oi > 3
u* o> 5
a cc (i)
ex ex
«— — ex ex <» ex —
ex ex
s t
§ £
ex o
•^ ex
ex —
•2-
a. a>
6V
Ol
•K«
o*
o
a
CM
m
>
r*~
>
in
ut
CNI
%n
^*
UJ
UJ
O-
Of
-o
O
CD
O*
JJ
CD
UJ
CM
■«-•
as
-*-»
cm
o
m
£Z
cm
o
n
fc
o
4/»
tit
«=>
-*-•
<=►
UJ
CM
UJ
<=>
<=>
u
1
is
1
i
i
-o
■o
i
I
1
o
fNI
lO
-*-<
CM
—
m
UJ
cm
UJ
CM
C
u->
m
CN
1/1
CM
cm
■♦-
-o
U
u
-o
^*
-o
■
w
^*
•*■
«x
«x
«F
LP
n
i
J— <
m
1
0/
in
i
cv
i
— •
m
■*-*
m
i
■
IT)
1
(A
in
i
OJ
m
i
Uw
m
v
CM
u
CM
J=
C-H
j=
cm
3
CM
3
r-*
CM
rxi
<I
■■*
<K
"^_
^*
~~
*—
m1
t— )
—
C_J
rx)
u_
**"
E
— —
cm
SC
ex
K»
2 is
Cst L.NUOU-UtN^M ft M a> <o £ M
<=> O O CM CM 0£O^M^MHO
in tn a. c~xi q. c-s» o.in~u-i~rxj— cm^cm
-a e -o a> *c oi <*- a/ -o L-flu*u*m*
m in m
I UJ I UJ I
CM ^ CM >< CM
- a cn z *
:»» uo cm c m t3 in
: . C-50
-o -o m m
m m u-> »
rx ex r* to
e m
o o
g
2 g g
g g
s s
evj o CM
g 2
r»* cm) cn>
9
g ° S g §
~ g g
!2 «
O Ol
g
Ol
m
—
o*
a
o
rsi
<n
>
r-^
»
in
t/«
cm
</»
w
c_>
CJ
»*
at
-o
o.
aa
UJ
CO
LU
cm
<*-■
CD
CM
-o
ui
-e
cm
o
o
o
4/1
ui
o>
-*->
<=>
LJ
cs
L-i
o
fe
i
fe
i
1
■o
1
"O
1
Cm
u-i
— i
cm
in
UJ
CM
LU
CM
m
1*
CM
M>-
-a
L.
w
-o
mo
4>
«•■
MT
*r
<c
*r
<X
♦
^»
•*-
3
4fl
in
*/»
iO
m
to
—'
in
— '
m
■
m
a>
m
<U
m
i
■*-<
Ol
tv
•
i
1
1
i/«
1
£
<~M
fc-
0*4
.e
cm
j=
CM
3
cm
=3
cm
CM
CM
£
r*<
™
«x
N"
— *
*—
CJ
~*
UJ
CM
u_
^-
— •
(VI
-X ■=> «x
ti. in ll tn
2 2 £
is
CVi
(_i
o
O
Csi
■*-<
u->
a.
Csi
c
-o
ai
•
a
^*
u.
in
•
<->
m
I
*-
cvt
^
rs*
U (N 4J CN
a rsi a. m — m —cm
m
r*
ui O*
LO
o-
i
o
OlO*
ai
-o
r*
3
1
H-
i
— cm
cvt
■A-*
CM
i_>«r
(_>
^
LO
^"
CM — r>« *CV1 J M M IN _ -
«•■ a. » >— -» t— oi «■ — C— 51
— o
O ~d k-
•a k/i
— O
> Q.
O
in
Ol
on
w ai
>->/«>.
~ o
— at
tan
^ is a
" o -
£
2 b
*« Ol
v*j r^ — as — j c*n
o m — lA o
k» i — i — i
a u~i .*-< cm ■*-> m
IT*
" CM
VI in
*- t
k. CM
in w)
U N UJ CS
-*- m ■«-> m •
k- cm w rs r rx r m 3 cm
<r — «XMrN— — «.— Mrc_> —
r*
o
—
o
MM
s
MM
fe
r*
&
CM
o
MM]
CM
CM
CM
Oj
-o
CM
<=>
<_>
CM
(_»
<=>
o
o
o
CM
CM
«=>
-C
O
CM
<=>
•
■— '
1
■*-*
1
■*-"
1
I
*-»
1
-*-'
t
1
u-)
IP
CM
en
CM
IN
in
in
a.
CM
a.
CM
m
in
CM
CM
■—>
CM
-a
^
•r
c
*r
=
-o
c
-o
Of
OJ
tn
-o
-o
£_)
MT
(->
tn
3
3
Mr
•*■
^
MT
MT
MT
B
MT
^
MT
■
Ol
ITS
1
Oj
in
i
Lk.
m
u-
i
u.
m
i
t_3
in
i
CJ
i
CJ
m
i
>»
-*
m
i
C
m
i
c
m
i
m
i
£
£
cm
>-
cm
:*-
r*
cm
CM
CM
CM
CM
M
CM
■
CM
CM
CM
"■■
CM
-*
rsi
ac
»-n
>M.
MT
-«.
••■
CM
*■-
MT
a.
•*
— "
CM
*P"
•_
s
in c-m
o» o
<» ex
s
£ 2
m —
r» in
2 2 3 S
-» ex
> r^ > w) HI ex
CM
— — U
O O Ma.
— tj O- O) -CI — . «C» —
k. I — I — I
O ul *i N v rfl
— -o >. «r i_ ~C
» «x » «x w
mm in in
I
UJ (N UJ M Cin Ul (N U1 CNI
*rf m 4w in am
m m m t*.
k_c-i k, e«* jb •"* jb s! Si •*• a c>4 ■•» rsi a r«
«x — «x*r— — i— *r c_) — cj r>* l*_ *r mz — •
I"
i/i
—1
o
t>->
£
rO
»■
o
o
<x
O
k.
(VI
o
rx
c_i
o
o
O
O
o
OJ
i
■*—
1
est
m
in
ex
CN
•T-
e
-o
C
-o
at
•W
**-
-o
•*•
tea
m
i
LW
i
u.
1
CJ
1
r-i
>-
r-4
r*
CM
^
*o
dB
**
3K
—
w> em c u-i -o -o
rs« *t>i x r* r* r-»
w u"> ~C r-
s
est cm
rx ex —
m o. » —
S5 P». -O CM
OS — K» M3 r* O* — •<?
iri-o — »-o«rm —
w «r rx k> ~o — i-^
— in cm
3
ai
r» in o •»
tr-> ■=> cr- m p*
r-» »^ » Si t~t
o- in
CM CNt
CM CM
ai ■->
■o in
s o
2 *
s 5 a
s * »* «?
_. _, <LJ
OJ
MM
cr
o
o
est
.
m
<X
O
>
u-i
lO
t/1
t-j
t_)
O-
Of
-43
O
CD
C*~
LU
rs*
OO
o
IT)
-e
rs<
n
o
fc
o
Ul
••I
<Si
o
•
OJ
■
M—
<=►
CJ
rsi
t— i
*o
O
-a
I
I
o
m
-t—l
r-4
— >
u-l
LU
OJ
UJ
C-sl
c
in
un
CN*
**-
-o
Ih.
w
-O
*r
-o
■
*■
•
<r
<r
=3
+r
IP
ITS
ITS
m
w
in
-*--
m
«
in
0j
m
a>
m
m
•<
1
0/
&
1
i
i/>
i
i
fc.
CM
j=
j=
cm
3
3
r%<
c**:
£
cm
cm
<x
H"
— I
►—
■*■
C_)
—
(— »
L-W
■•
-*
cm
CM
«s
r->
r->
o
O
O
<x
cS
CM
o
s
CM
C_l
o
CM
EJ
CM
*^-
M-.
1
—>
•
— -
1
u-1
m
GL
Cm
O.
CM
2 ±i
lw tn u, m
cm ^ cm
o. m ■ --> m — CS| .mm CM «». -x
q *■ » * ■*■ -* mt
u*i >- u-j c m em-Tstn
cj i <• i —i —i *r i
5 *r a. «•» i ►_ cni ♦ - C-54
§•
z s
2 *
m co r—
in » » — • in
s
2
S
»■ oo cm
— -o o
CM — O
cm cm in
8
S
u~i <j> to
on — 10 — uo — u-»— -in tn io <r vo <c to
C*-4 O ps4 0
(NatNU.rNl^NlL
— UNO
MU*U«UNU
5 £
a
C-55
m <i in c
2 ^
m en m w in
LO tN CO N
MorsoMaiNQNa
^ H- — * H- (N h- »-^ t— ^" *
3
10 <i io aj lo
c* « r* « o* « r* s r*
if 11 o
oca.
a. o
■ —
o tit
t_» iii
ai
**- *^
— o Oi
*V k. h.
u-> —
I
in m
-» tx
— — <=>
o — —
ai a.
o -a
C-56 |g
■5 fe
aaoD co r* cm o -o •=> r- — • co o m i* * — »•
tn in oo in ♦ ^ — »n csi o •■ » cm ^ cm -o o- aa cm cm d -o «« t-o -o — —
©* in — cni o* in o cm - •=> o* — -o ■=> cni <^ cm — -o o O cm cm o cm o o
— — - <^ 0> — < — O O — <5» — CS| — . 3 O <5 O CM — <5 <5 O O • CM «0 U «A
I I I I I I I i ■*-> > I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I « I ■
cm cs« m m cm cm m mem csi csi •» m m m m cm csi m m m in • cm wnatt/i
m in in mMinMinMin<-iin Kiin<tin<cin<tin<tin<cinc/iininin in m m momoin in « in ai in
^i3Z|-3rt<Xi<Xi«Xi<ri-*-'i_jiC3<C3iCDtc3it— )t t_3 i ij_ I l_*». I ui_ i u_ i <c i <x i ac ■ :^ ' »fl<
||| O CM Q tX cS IN Me <** Me gg Me Ej l*V CM W gg »■» CM Q CM CJ CM 1J CM Q CM M CM M CM M CM ^ CM M CM «Q CM «« CM <g gM flg CM *^ CM 3 CM
oi oi
Ok w
i/> a.
i/i
■o
-»-
— 01
• a.
at
i/> e
Ol —
a. m
3
O
oi c ai
— i/> ov
CM l-"»
cm m
CM
r» cm in m in
in in in in in in
o- t— oo — • —
o • • • ■ «
CM — CM h"> O
CM —
— — CM
CM —
— CM
1
I
m
in
ai
m
^
^
—
o»
in
CM
o>
m
o
o
"O
-™
•*
o
CM
CM
in
in
CM
CM
m
«e
^
-e
-o
w
-o
*
*
^
*
m
in
in
m
in
m
in
3T
1 2
C 1
■E
i
•X
i
<X
i
•X
i
<r
C3
CM
<=
CM C
3 CM
13
CM
CM
CM
u.
CM
u.
l_)
*■•
(->
CM C
3 *■*>
C_l
*^
c_>
«
CJ
CM
l_>
C_l
r-» cm
in cm
CM
-8 2: s 2 s
^
s
CM 2 g
CM
s
s
CM
in a in
m m in
in ■ cm
-O — —
CM O O
<= L_> o>
I I
in ui in
s
C-57
s
2
Sm oi m tn
2 S S K
in in in in a
U. < L*. I Ll- I U. > <X
SnaNanQNaiNd
♦ *- — (— CM »— f> t— » 3B
Sin in « m
SCM S CM «X CM
at m
3 CM
S
— t^
<j
o»
<u
o
o.
Q.
u>
._
*-»
Of
--^
m
O
Oj
e ••• in
— — o
~ o
cm —
e
ai —
u* in
IK O
CM —
r^£
o»
I
CM
MT
in
«_» —
- 3 S
CM — d
s
s
u-> co 5S » m* — U"J CM o — •» <--j 3 o* -£
in-'CMor-inocM>9o>->Mi9CM9o
— o o — • — o o — o — cm — 3 o 9 a
I til i *^ i i i i i t
CMir>ir>CMCMi/iinemcMCMdi/iminincMCMinmin
m- -o -o ^- Mr Ml -O —> -O _J M- M- MT -O Ml M) Ml mp mt mj Ml M)
mt mt mt mt mt m- mt w »— m» m» mt mt m- <c m- er m- m- m- m- mt m»
in in in — io — inoin-in *in<in«in«in«in«inin«iuiin in in in in a in
3ri3;i«x<«xi«xi<ri*jt — (icsiOiQi(3i(_)tt_jiLi_iL^>L»-iu^i<ri
NaNONU.NILNlL(NU.(N L M P r4U(Ny(NU(StJNU}MUMOC>ia(NaNOM«r4
cs.<_)"^>i_>m-cj— <_jc>it-i»->(_>M-a>-><r — S — »o>i2'-na»M-arrtatM->— — _oj._i->_»atr^
S 3 «*
O
•
CNI
S
1
04
-o
O
^*
«#■
CJ
«T
9
x
I
3
r-^
C3
CNI
<•
u.
■■■
o -o
i-J o
I
u* ITS
* -o
a ■*■
at u*j
r*4 a o* <x r* a
«■» Cfc. m pa «r C
I
C-58
CM CM CM
Of h_ *§
h a tfi
o
3
ai ui
k- a
3 a.
in .-•
■» ~ ai
ai •• k.
Ol Ol -W
-a ^ i.
in Q u)
£ £ S
— m — un
in i-i in
a
o
^,
^.
o
CM
2
CM
o»
o
_:S
o*
CM
-o
s
CM
s
CM
CM
in
c in
C-4
CM
I
1
in
1
in
in
1
in
1
CM
-a
— o
—I
^
^
-o
-o
-o
-a
^
^
^
♦
♦
^
^
<x
■*■
U1
4/1 m
<X
*o
s
m
s
in
<x
in
<x
in
en
in
cr>
in
IT)
i
-^ 1
— I
1
1
i
<=>
i
o
i
CJ
i
i_i
1 u.
1 li.
s
s
s
tn a m a m
in ia m
m <r in a< m
u r< u
C-59
o cm
s s
s s
s
in
CM
CM
■=•
»"»
m
in
CM
CM O
s s
o — —
o
lit
k. ■■
a. k.
o> in o
— — o>
- o o- — -o
— . ■ O — CM —
ir>»— in^^m*— in — in i/im«m«m4tnc
O M O
•o
mO
o
r~
—
CO
«
in
*y
M
o-
-o
-o
ta-
ee
rsi
r>*
o>
-o
«x
f >
~£)
S
r^i
O
r*
-O
CM
r^i
CN
O
o
o.
rsi
~*
o>
o»
o
o>
*
CM
•O
<_J
w
m
U">
in
m
r>*
r>*
in
in
U-5
in
CM
m
iTi
m
-o
-o
-o
-o
-o
-o
-O
-O
n
^-
-c
r
-o
<r
<x
»
n
^-
1
m
1
en
m
t_n
m
1
u_
m
I
IT)
1
in
i
in
t
o
in
i
C3
in
z
in
i
<x
in
i
i
i_>
r-Mi
rD
CmI
[_D
l^Mj
<=»
in
r^i
c*»
r-*
<x
r-Mj
<I
r^i
r*
<x
EM
3
CM
JC
m^
Z
Z
■1
►—
^^
fr-
r^j
»-—
co
*—
^f
z
f-*>
m*
Uu.
—
•— 1
^
-■-
C-6C
— CM
e i- a
a at a.
— lA
- a
— a>
=j o w
« if a
Si
o c»
« cm
in
o m
-4-> O
<o •=>
s
CM O CSI
f> O O « O
«- u-j S o o
w- m
»■ u-> ill
" •=> O <=>
«*■ o- O u-l
in m
CM
CM CM CM
s s
CM CM
CM CM CM CM
s
m
oo
m
in
CM
<=>
<z>
CM
m
in
^>
-a
-0
♦
U")
m
in
1
3
CM
3:
1
CM
— — <=>
IO CM O -» »
CM • O »• — -O
O — <=> — CM —
I ■»-• I I I I
mem cm cm o
•0
CM
s
3
CM
•O
0
CM
s
in
in
in
CM 2 8
CM
s
s
in 9 r»*
in \*\ m
•^ O ^ U M u ♦
in — m— .in— -m — in ji ^ « in a u-i
1 <x 1 <r i <z ' <r '
— U W CJ *"■>
S £
r g
in<xin<xincnmcnin
cjr-iLDrMieDrMjcarMicsc-Mii^rMtcarMi
m <x u-j oj in
.... 1 =E 1 ^ I
«M«XMa(N«X(N 3 £2
3 ■?
C-61
■^ -o
•o «o
•s ^ •» o o
CM cm cm
cm cm cm
cm cm cm -o cm
m ^*
CM CM CM CM
8
O CM CM CM
cm -o »
CM CM
CM CM CM
CM O
CM CM ^* CM
<=■ o <=>
CM ^
O Of
<=> o
•o <o
CM CM CM
CM -» —
b-> a.
CM fc.
CM CM CM CM CM CM
CM O
O CM
<=> o
— CM CM O
■«- <=
a.
-»-
CU
u>
c
tU
l/>
-4-»
l/l
M
O
— CM
MT Mf1 — ■• Irt
s: 2 s
_: S 2; s ± 2
3
u-1 — tf->~ u-l — un — in utlD
a cm a
a m <_>
^ u-) <t u-i <r in <x
-•-. i _i i c3 i a
CM
-o
O-
ao
§
CM
-o
O
CM
-^
m
tn
CM
CM
-o
■mO
^T
*r
«x
^*
<X
♦
«*■
c/i
»n
en
in
m
in
<_1
i
CJ
i
Li-
i
u-
i
2
C"*l
CD
CM
CS
CM
e=»
CM
*o
Z
**
►—
— 1
^
CM
s
U-l « 04
m a m o m
m « m ai m
Q(NQCN«(N<CCNOCN«(N
C-62
CM
ft
in
-O
r*.
CO
cr-
•9
CM
i^>
in
mO
r*~
CO
o>
-o
CM
ft
in
O
o
«
<=>
<=>
o
O
•o
<=>
r>*
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
■o
—
fc_
Ol
o
-o
•
fi
3
OB
31
cm
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
r*
cm
CM
CM
CM
r*i
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
— -
m
a
a.
in
CD
—
_
MT
CM
•o
r»
•»
CD
O-
r*
in
-O
CM
MT
!»■>
-O
as
O*"
CM
o»
ft
«>
r—
r«»
MS
e
m
MT
bJ
a-
<=»
k.
■n cd
-a
c
cm
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
o
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
3
U.
«■»»
^rf
a
HI
O
e
Q.
o
«m
in
r-.
1
cr-
CM
GD
o
CM
R
r*
M3
3
Tt
O
r*
o
M?
O"
CM
CM
ft
Mr
U fc-
in
ft
r»
r».
r»
-O
MT
CM
K>
MS
r»
MS
CM
r>»
ft
o o
Qt
— *v
k
<x —
in
r—
CO
MS
CD
MS
r*.
III
-d
r*.
■1
ft
ft
u
■«-*
k.
lit
3
a
O
Iff
k.
i->
"™
MS
mt
•*
™J
mt
CM
CM
OS
CM
MT
o-
""
ro
CM
CM
MS
CM
in
in
r~
in
CO
B
3
o
o
2
<=•
IM.
o
CM
mt
in
A
r-*
MS
MS
CO
MT
CM
MT
CO
■ft*
o
a<
k.
M
a.
m
»
-
-
CM
-
O
in
a
ill
o
Bl
a.
fi
*^
OB
O-
-a
CD
r>«
r«»
mt
MT
•o
•M
•M
CM
in
^*
•=>
o
CO
r*.
CM
mt
in
in
in
CM
a
kj
in
-o
Mr
<=>
r»
CM
-o
M
O
ro
CM
ro
MT
o
CM
ft
o*
r^
r*-
CO
O"
fi
Iff
in
MT
CM
^^
CM
•M
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
ai
Lb
r*
a.
ea
in
MT
ft
O"
CM
*o
fi
-*->
-o
in
c
o
3
a.
Lb
CO
r*.
MT
-o
O-
o
r*-
CO
ft
MT
<=>
CD
CM
o»
•+-*
M
ft
CM
e#»
CM
CO
K>
O
er-
MT
in
ft
r*.
o»
O
CO
in
cr
0# <C
in
CM
K»
CM
CM
CM
(-»
CM
ft
•^ LU
O 3C
ai
k.
k.
O. r4
o>
o
O
■=>
•o
O
o
•
o
O
CM
CM
CM
CM
o
01
o
■=>
<=>
c
o
o
o
o
CM
•M
-w
u
in
Ol
o
k.
a.
T3
O
•o
a
<=
•=>
■=>
o
o
o
o
r»
CO
ro
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
er»
S
K>
mt
o>
ro
""*
O
CM
in
o»
ro
in
ft
CM
CM
CM
CM
Iff
Oj
!■
k.
kl
a.
in
a
a.
CM
u>
u
<o
s
o
O
o
MT
in
O*
s
s
«4
»
CO
CO
•=>
s
o
s
<=•
o
o
in
o-
MS
as
o»
a
o
in
o
f>
o
CM
hO
•o
o
<=>
o-
o
CM
o
r-«
CM
CD
O
CM
s
in
1-1
•*>
MT
MT
r*.
CM
CM
CM
o»
r»-
o
CM
CM
CM
CO
o-
r^
f>
o-
CO
CM
CO
CO
^*
MS
in
to
MS
ao
MT
CM
o»
A
ft
in
o*
«■
MT
-O
o
o
co
—
co
—
MT
MS
—
MT
CM
ft
MT
ft
—
Iff
ai
m
k.
u
OL
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
o.
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
iff
-w
ii
m
o
k.
a.
3
PM|
o
•o
o
O
O
r^
o»
mt
■o
MT
-=>
ro
WW
Mr
•=>
<=>
s
s
in
O
O
•=>
O
r*»
Q
41
r-o
o
a
o
o
CO
f*
MT
MS
CO
-a
O*
M>
<=>
O
r-*
MS
o
O
in
CM
a
Iff
CD
s
in
CO
r**
CM
r^
in
CO
CM
CM
in
O
er-
CM
MS
CD
•o
ft
in
MT
o
in
CM
r*.
CM
MT
r*.
CO
r*.
MT
CM
O
r-.
e
jC
MT
r»
ro
l->
—
O
CM
K>
w«
MT
MT
MT
CM
CD
MS
r—
O
CM
MT
iff
■1
(■
k.
u
a.
o
o
o
o
«
e»
o
O
•=>
o
O
O
Of
o
<=>
o
<=•
o
C3
<;>
o
o
o
o
e
-"->
u
ai
■_
4-*
in
-a
o
c
Q.
c
e
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
O
O
O
o
o
<=•
O
o
<=►
O
o
«>
o
o
a
•■■■
1
■M
c
k
• ■*
CL
<»
<=>
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
O
O
O
■=>
o
-0
o
o
O
<=>
«=»
o
o
<=
e
«J
Iff
in
CJ
o
(=»
0
_
o
<=>
o
o
o
•o
o
o
<=■
o
O
O
O
o
■o
o
o
o
o
■O
o
o
o
<=>
o
e
i
ai
at
e
k
>
in
*-
•n
i
kj
r^
MS
CM
<=>
o
*«
er
a — -
in
in
CO
CO
CO
in
MT
«
CO
in
CM
CM
•=>
„
MT
O
CM
5
o
CM
M3
cr
CO
CM
CD
CM
s
2 i»
ft
MT — .
MS — .
o>
cv ««
cr-
in
o
CM
o.
o»
in
I
CM
_J
s
cr-
CM
•O
s
r*4
s
CM
O
CM
MS
s
s
CM
o
CM
o
CM
CM O
o
o
iff >
i
i
1
1
1
i
i
i
•«->
1
i
1
1
1
i
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
■
1
1
i
r*j -«-j
cm
CM
in
in
CM
CM
in
in
c
in
CM
CM
o
in
ir>
m
in
CM
CM
m
in
m
in m
CM
in m
in
CD w
Mr
MT
-o
-o
mt
-o
-o
MI _1
mt
MT
~o
*o
-o
-o
MT
MT
-o
•o
-a
MS o
MT
-o •
MS
U
♦
MT
MT
MT »—
MT
MT
^
■*■ <r
«*■ <x
MT
MT
**t>
««r
MT CJ
MT 3
•» CU
in
in
in
in —
in ~™
in ~-
in ~
in
m
m <c
in <x
IT) <X
in <x
V §
in ui
l/l C/l
in
in
in
in
in cd
? s
in
in <x
in ai
in
-fc- '"^
3C 1
a: ■
X t :
C 1 «x
1 <x
■ «x
i
-*-*
1 C3
1 O
i a
1 C_J
I t_J
1 Lk
1 Lk
1 Lk
1 u_
1 <c
i m
i
2 =3
ea cm
ea cm
3 CM Lk
CM Lk
CM Lk
CM Lk
CM
l-
CM ►—
a &
CM C_J
CM CJ
K 2
rs« co
O* CD
cm ea
CM £=>
cm est
CM ca
» 2
R f
CM C3
cm <r
CM 3
CM
c_> -~
CJ c- ■
U M U v U
-» I_)
CM CJ
(-> CJ
*
<x
»-^ <x
— z
CM z
<*• at
►^ ac
-^ k-
CM r—
i-o ^~
MT Lk
Mr «r
ft
o
cr a*
a. k»
ai
-o a,
— ' w
in a.
o */»
o
u
c
o o
— o
i/i w «
a rM
at a«
2 S S
-O C_l C* CJ C*
cv.
<c
»
-o
u-l
o
ri
£
CV1
o
o*
1
at
i
a.
i
r*
t-l
u-»
ac
m
^
»W
-o
-o
o
u-i
•
in
I
i/->
1
rs*
V
r^i
CU
rx
C-64
CM W
— J!
ti* m o
oca.
1— ) M<
CM
a, a,
o -a
O CVl
oj m
s
— -o —
U N U N
■— * c-j
r^ u c* « c-h
CVl
<x
CT-
-o
in
o
rv*
•o
CM
1
at
i
i
CVl
<j
u-)
oc
m
^
■V
-o
-o
a
to
tn
U1
b-
u-J
CNi <x tx v r*i
fN (U N
C-65
— I/I
I/I •-•
-o —
W Q. — '
*» — - l/l
■I o w
« Ul ^
u-» ~*
— in
— • c*
o
O <U
£ 2 £
■_
CD
<_i as
»
CM
<X ar-
CM
-a
lO
s?
s
CM
CM
o
. o
J.
1
in
1
CM
Oi I
ai I
ae in
in i/i in k. m
a a
35245
C-66
•P4 ■*• O.
u a*
Oi a.
— in
at
u»
•^. o» 01
>- k. u
— O Q.
u> z a
o
a>
w
3
a ai
12 8
t_> aa
C4
<x o-
-o
u-i
o
04
~s
cv*
•O
ai i
Ol 1
rv»
u ITS
ae iS~>
m in i/n h. irt
U (N U 04
CH CJ Ol CJ
- « CM «i
(M U (S
5? S - £ 5 £
C-67
t
tfl
ft L flt
*— cz> en
o
in oj
Of
Ul -*-»
Ol III
fc- o
m *n u
4 a »■
u ■ 01
ft 41 M
— . ui <a
.a in k.
u n u
CD
•v
CN4
<r
u->
o
Ol
-o
m
-o
1
ITJ
t
s
3
1
rsi
l
a*
Csi
o
I
O*
«"■■*
U*ft
ir>
rsi
u
ITJ
oc
^"
«*■
-o
-o
•w
-^
-o
*■
^
**•
^
o
u->
ir>
m
ir>
u-a
*/t
m
h_
<z
i
«x
i
-x
i
i
-*-»
i
■+->
r^
-o
Cs|
r*
3
est
o«
<N4
<x
Osl
<r
PO
<r
•
—
<X
^-
K
C-68
3
« CM
o m
o a>
in u_
? ;
cm
>
Ol
s
& 2 a a a
CO
«r
CM
<x cr-
<=>
CM
-a
in
in
s
s
s
CM
~S
CM
A
1
in
1
CM
HI 1
u m
oc in
Mr-
-o
-a
Mr-
•» -o
~» MS
Mr'
♦
Mr-
a. Mr
o mt
m
m
in
m
i/i m
k. in
i
<X 1
« 1 -
- i
«J 1
■»• ■
^3^;*s
r-6Q
O. 01
*» u
CJ — +-
I » lit
■ W o
o Ol O.
■ — */»
Kl O
— O*
*• O. Ol
o ■*-< a.
3 O w.
— <-D C3
■*-< ' — * -C
— o
a, a
ai e
s
s
2 S S
CM
CM
s
n u in * m
in in in in w »n
«x i . — i *- i -*- i
C-7C
§ z
• a.
cr-
Ol
2 3
s
e
M
ex
o>
•o
ex
ex
ex
o*
B
■o in
— o
> CL
a
fc-
o
ex
<=>
•=>
■k
ex
ex
ex
Ml
k.
•« at
at k.
o
»*
ex
f»
♦
c
ex
ex
ex
ex
ex
Ol
>n — .
— in
•c o
i a.
B
at
«M
ex
i->
»
■MM
» ex
a ex
— Ui
•i at
in >
<• •—
ca —
u
•» ai
■*- ■•■*
e2 eS
o —
s
CM
MUI/)
in ui m l. in
5.2
a s s s a s 2
C-71
— ex t*> xr m
s s
ex r~ a- K) K>
S 3
in m k> ex
ex ex ex ex ex
f> ex
s s ♦
f» ex
*3 S
S S R S
m -o
ex o ex ex ex
ex o
ex o in in
• ■ •
■o ill
c o
exexexexexexexex
o in o S o
ex w in o ex
ex ex ex ex
ex ex
•o o o « «
■O u"> <0 -O u"i
m» ex oo o xr
lO CO O O X-
-O — U") CO
ex ex —
o ex
—• ex
in —
s^^ssas^s
ex ex
in m in in in in m in ^ m
C-72
C* CH
01 O
Ol —
"0 u
k- o
CO _i
n <• o
g. § =■
o J>
u in
Ol
«^ *^
•— o a,
■+ i- k.
-w gl a.
in —
a
5- ai
<K k.
ex
v. 01
O w
a< •«
lo t—
u o
Oi Q.
— a
M ft U
s
a
m
CJ
o-
M
U
r-^
U
O
ifl
>
ai
o
1
t-J
•O
■-*
M
un
— ,
in
Ol
-o
-a
-o
<s tn a. «n
a. ■ i
<v ex >- ex
C-73 3S
Of I M I
i/> Ul — U*l
»» o* >- rs*
in
o
— in
at
B- 5"
■m m in
> a. —
i_ a. -~
CM CM
CSI Irt
cm cm
ai
o
o
k- o»
a ai
a> in
r
I
2 u
f in a. in
C-74
2 S
" S u S
a. > — '
w* o~i — u~»
CV -O J3 -O
C ^" 3 ♦
*• in a_ u~>
a. i I
*V C* >- C«i
s
Ol
o
IM
O 3
e in
ai o
g
OJ 3
a ai
~^ t/» *»
jo */» ■».
tyi <=» tn
i- a
o
r->
cj
o-
M
—
LU
c_l
—1
r—-
u
o
t-N|
Ol
•o
l-l
o
>
a*
1
1
in
in
u">
CD
.**
■i
-o
X3
-o
ai
01
a
u •=>
>
a> i
>■« i
»»
tit in
— u->
>■ in a. in
«• r* >- c*
•i m (l tn
C-75 °s
O A
u a
£ 5
ex r<
ai
CP
w
F u -
s
<-J
M
-**
1
»
i/i
=
k.
o
o
a.
a.
J<
^-*
■«
■•^
»*J
o
a>
■»
a.
0/
c
>-
t-
o
-*-*
*t
o»
3
a
CO
o
(N k.
at
e si
111 k.
■a
k. —
a i/i
yi
1
<=. o>
in
— ' ai
— a
> Ck
—
— J>
M O
CJ o- — —
C-> ~- —J f*»
QJ 1 — I
i/» LO — i 1/1
i un a- w/")
a. i i
9 o* >- o*
5c
CD *-
C-76 lg
2 u
«■ \r» a. in
n i i
« r* >- cs
1 *
3
|
3 iS
t"* c*
■2 -
•o 1*
c a
(M O
2
-s •
3
§
£2
Q — _i r-»
"80S
«> 1 — 1
3 m — . in
at -o .0 -o
i in & in
a. 1 1
9 o* >- r*
C-77
EVALUATION TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED
2020 North 14th Street
Arlington, Virginia 22201 (703)525-5818