Another One Bites the Dust?

29 Apr

Posted by Agnes Varnum as Big Picture, Real Deals

When AIVF was dying slowly, if you remember, what it looked like was desperate emails looking for donations that would save it. Another nonprofit, Film Arts Foundation in San Francisco, has adopted this strategy. Instead of the usual newsletter, we received a special plea following on the heels of a similar request that went out in late March. The letter says in part:

Film Arts Foundation has not closed its doors. The success of our negotiations will ensure that the hundreds of independent filmmakers across the country that rely on the resources Film Arts provides will continue to be nurtured as before. This is the legacy of Film Arts Foundation and it will be carried forward.

Film Arts Foundation’s debts must be reduced in order for us to enable the proposed transition. The organization is continuing the emergency campaign to raise $150,000 between now and May 31, 2008.

I suppose tightening the belt by reducing services and raising money to pay off debt could possibly save the organization. I hope so, but it ain’t looking good from where I’m sitting. What are the elements that make a financially sustainable professional service organization for filmmakers? Are these organizations just being mismanaged? Losing one was hard for the independent community; losing more than one will be a trend.

Tags: aivf, film arts foundation, nonprofits

3 Responses

From inside FA

June 12th, 2008 at 2:31 am
1

As it is sad that we are losing yet another resource for independent filmmakers. This organization just didn’t have the leadership from it’s Executive Committee to make the difficult decisions earlier on to fend off the financial problems it’s been having. In a desperate act, they hired a lackluster ED, which doesn’t help, it compounds the problem.

* Nevermind the financial problems, government audit, and the internal problems of mismanaging grants and other government funding.

So mismanaged yes, but media organizations have to offer unique services to it’s community and it goes beyond the inexpensive services and classes. I think innovation is the key and being a leader in this innovation will keep and organization viable. Again, an unfortunate blunder of the Executive Committee not taking Strategic Planning seriously and seeing the problems before they already happened led to their fall.

Also, a fresh edge is always needed, I think Film Arts crutched it’s way through the last year or so on it’s history, but didn’t look to it’s future. A fruitful and drastically underpaid staff kept the hope alive just long enough to have to carry the burden on it’s shoulders. Their knowledge of the old and the past helped to brand the new-innovative-fresh Film Arts, but that just didn’t jive with the higher ups and were dismissed quickly.

Just one last insight, when you start to see the key staff start to be cut or leave on their own accord without warning, this is a very bad sign. If you want to get a true feeling for a non-profit organization, talk with the staff and not the board members.

And never forget you members.
Agnes Varnum

June 18th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
2

It sounds like you are from the area and perhaps have more insight into what is happening there. I appreciate all of your comments, but I’d also like to hear what SHOULD a media arts be doing for filmmakers? Media arts organizations around the country, I think, are trying to feel their way a bit. The internet has dramatically increased ability to connect and network, and to find information–two domains of such professional service oriented programs from the past. What suggestions do filmmakers have to help these organizations remain relevant?
ex-AIVF staffer

August 10th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
3

What should happen is a real development on the Board of Directors side to develop the financial capacity necessary to help support the expensive artform that is film.

For an arts organization based in the heart of silicone valley, there is not one person on the board of FAF with a connection to venture capital or private equity. The one attorney on the board is not of the ilk to connect the organization real financial support.

There are arts organizations right now running $1 billion capital campaigns and succeeding, this is not the fault of the organization being an arts organization, this is a failure of the board of directors. Any capital campaign must be supported at the board level. I would like to know what lead gifts the board has given. Without board support– any non-profit organization would fail.