25 November 2021
Nic Lane
[FYI request #17389 email] Tēnā koe Nic
I refer to your request received on 29 October 2021, which has been considered under
the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA), for information about the 'Creative Arts
Recovery and Employment (CARE)' - 'Creative Spaces' initiative. Please find a
response to each part of your request below:
1. Are you able to supply (by region) what the total funded amount paid to
artists will be, compared with administrators?
We do not hold data on how the amount of funding will go towards art tutors to support
participants versus how much would go towards administrators.
The funding goes directly to creative spaces to source new fulltime equivalent (FTE)
roles for outreach and/or increase hours of existing staff to increase their outreach.
We can provide a breakdown of Creative Spaces funding by region (Graph One), and
Creative Spaces Outreach participant targets per region (Graph Two)
Graph One: Manatū Taonga Creative Spaces funding by
region
$8,000,000
$7,000,000
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
$4,000,000
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$0
Graph Two: Manatū Taonga Creative Spaces Funding
Outreach participant targets
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
Data provided in Graph Two shows the regions where funded creative spaces are
located and are not necessarily reflective of the regions where the outreach will
occur. Data on regions where outreach will be delivered will not be available until
early 2022.
2. How many FTE roles were created?
The Creative Spaces initiative (the Initiative) created 36.69 new FTE roles across 54
creative spaces. In addition, the equivalent of 28.52 FTE worth of additional hours (of
existing staff members) has been funded across these 54 creative spaces.
3. Of these roles, how many roles were created for individuals with lived
experienced of disability?
We collect data from all the creative spaces funded through the Initiative which breaks
down the participants with lived experience of disability, we do not collect this data for
staff or volunteers.
4. How was the co-design with 'clients' assessed to ensure services were
designed with, and for persons with lived experience of disability?
Manatū Taonga worked closely with Arts Access Aotearoa to design this Initiative,
and Arts Access Aotearoa worked closely with the creative spaces sector to gather
insights. Funded creative spaces are responsible for the design and delivery of
services that are funded under this Initiative.
Manatū Taonga also used the report “Understanding the Value of Creative Spaces”
in the design of the fund. The document gives decision makers and agencies
information about the sector to better understand how the sector operates, the
2
services it provides and to whom. You can find a copy of the report here:
https://cdn.fld.nz/uploads/sites/artsaccess/files/images/1_2019/files_2019/Creative_s
paces_survey_report_FINAL.pdf
5. How were organisations & their governance assessed to see that they
were led by persons with lived experience of disability?
Organisations were asked to provide detail on the how their organisation meets the
definition of a creative space, including general information about their client base.
Successful organisations worked with Manatū Taonga and Arts Access Aotearoa to
develop their funding agreements. This engagement provided an opportunity to
understand more about the governance structure of their organisations, and some
self-identified information about the lived experiences of their teams. For privacy
reasons this information was not directly requested by Manatū Taonga.
6. What accessible formats were applications supplied in?
Information on the Initiative was available online via text searchable PDF which is
compatible with text to voice functions.
Arts Access Aotearoa were also engaged to support creative spaces to prepare and
submit funding applications. This support included providing assistance with
understanding the funding criteria and the review of applications. We encouraged
creative spaces to contact Arts Access Aotearoa for advice during the preparation of
applications via our public communications to the sector, and on the front page of the
application form.
7. How was accessibility designed into the approachability of the fund?
See previous questions 4, 5 and 6.
8. Who was the assessment panel?
The assessment panel was made up of three voting panel members, two from the arts
and cultural sector, and one representative from Manatū Taonga. External panelists for
both rounds were:
Dr Doris Kaua – Te Atihaunui-A-Paparangi and Ngāti Kahungunu ki Wairarapa.
Samoan affiliations are to the village of Faleasiu on the Island of Upolo, Samoa. Doris
is a Dr of Philosophy in Indigenous Studies and has experience in the NGO sector –
in management, governance, policy, strategic planning, project management and
implementation. She was on the Board of Arts Access Aotearoa for many years and
understands the role of creative spaces.
Angela Newell – Angela has extensive experience in the education and performing
arts sectors and representative of Southland. She was Creative Projects Manager at
Venture Southland/Great South for 19 years, and Director of the Southland Arts
Festival for 11 years. Angela is now a freelance theatre producer, director, actor and
qualified teacher. She is familiar with the work of the creative spaces in the Southland
district.
Manatū Taonga representatives were Principal Advisers, Simon Bowden for Round
One and Blaire Lodge-Perry for Round Two.
3
Non-scoring panel members included the Chair, Secretariat and Administrator from
Manatū Taonga. The Panel sessions were also attended by Kate Hiatt from Arts
Access Aotearoa. Kate was present in the panel discussions to provide any sector-
specific advice during the assessment process.
9. Do they have lived experience of disability?
We did not ask the Panel members to identify if they have lived experience of
disability, but their work experience indicates that they understand the role of
creative spaces and the work those spaces do for, with, and by people with lived
experience of disability.
10. How were they selected?
External panel members were selected on the basis that they understood and had
experience of:
- the arts and wellbeing sector in New Zealand and the needs of people with
disabilities when accessing cultural content
- the expertise required to develop programmes to enable participation in the
arts
- Mātauranga Māori, Te Ao Māori and Kaupapa Māori across the arts and/or
heritage sectors
- Pacific organisations across the arts and/or heritage sectors
- knowledge of the range of mediums that make up the cultural sector (eg,
visual and performing arts, music, film, heritage etc)
- experience of leading community arts projects and of the role of creative
spaces, and
- expertise across delivery mechanisms.
To mitigate potential conflicts of interest, external panel members were not currently
employed, or governor of a creative space.
Nine external members were identified through engagement with Arts Access
Aotearoa and other sector networks. Two were selected based on their availability to
evaluate applications.
11. How has the fund supported artists who face barriers have sovereignty
or Tino rangatiratanga over their art practice? Does Ministry of Culture &
Heritage have a definition of institutionalisation?
All successful creative spaces have entered into funding agreements with Manatū
Taonga that specify the details of what will be delivered by the creative space and
what they can expect from Manatū Taonga. Each agreement includes a specific
clause around intellectual property which states that any intellectual property held by
the organisation before signing the funding agreement, or created through the
duration of the arrangement, will remain the property of the creative space. Manatū
Taonga is required to seek permission from the creative space and the artist for the
reproduction of content, images or work that is created due to this funding.
Manatū Taonga has not provided guidance to creative spaces on how they should
manage the intellectual property of their artists. The management of the intellectual
property of artists is at the creative space’s discretion.
4
Manatū Taonga does not hold a Ministry-specific definition of “institutionalisation”.
If you wish to discuss this decision with us, please feel free to contact
[Ministry for Culture and Heritage request email] You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of this
decision. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or freephone 0800 802 602.
Nāku noa, nā
Joe Fowler (Nov 25, 2021 10:19 GMT+13)
Joe Fowler
Deputy Chief Executive
Te Aka Tūhono Investment and Outcomes
5
