Data ‘misleading’: advocate
‘‘It is very hard for people to speak up in this funding environment because they need to remain in Creative NZ’s good books to be sure of ongoing funding.’’ Terry Sheat
Creative New Zealand does not have robust data to prove its processes are working in the best way for the country’s artists, an advocate for arts funding reform says.
The agency’s annual satisfaction survey has not been higher than 68% in the past five years. Creative NZ says this shows twothirds or more of its clients have found its services satisfactory.
Combined with respondents who were neutral, the numbers indicated that about three-quarters of applicants were positive or neutral in terms of their overall satisfaction of Creative NZ’s services, said spokesperson David Pannett.
But Terry Sheat, the son of arts advocate Bill Sheat, said there were several issues with the ‘‘misleading’’ data.
Last year the annual survey was sent only to those who applied to the agency’s arts grants, not to long-term funding applicants, meaning those who have a longterm relationship with Creative NZ and know it best may have had no say, Sheat said.
And there was limited scope for honesty given Creative NZ held significant power in the applicant-funder relationship, Sheat said.
‘‘You can’t afford to complain,’’ Sheat said. ‘‘It is very hard for people to speak up in this funding environment because they need to remain in Creative NZ’s good books to be sure of ongoing funding.’’
Finally, the response rate to the survey was low, at only 17% in the 2020/21 year. ‘‘Who would bother responding to an organisation when they already don’t feel heard?’’
Creative NZ’s Pannett said the satisfaction rating was likely to be influenced by several factors, ‘‘including whether a respondent’s funding application was successful or not’’.
But Terry Sheat said the agency was not being specific enough with its questions, and that it should ask artists whether they felt its funding model was fit for purpose. Two-thirds of Creative NZ’s funding comes from lotteries.
Last month Sheat called for a public inquiry into how Creative NZ operates.
Dawn Sanders, the chief executive of the Shakespeare Globe Centre of NZ, which recently had a bid for funding declined, said it was ‘‘strange’’ that last year’s survey did not include applicants for long-term funding.
‘‘One would have thought that satisfaction canvassing should be ‘universal’ across all their programmes,’’ Sanders said.
The data shows that between 2016/17 and 2020/21 the satisfaction rate hovered between 64% and 68%. It was at its lowest point in the 2017/18 year, at 64.2%.
While the overall satisfaction question had consistently been in the survey, there was variation over the years in the sample of people who had been surveyed, said Pannett. Creative NZ valued feedback, which helped to improve its services over time.
In 2011 and 2015 market research agency Colmar Brunton prepared the survey. From 2017 onwards, except the 2019 year when no survey was sent out, Creative NZ has been preparing the survey itself.