In today’s New York Times there is an article about cuts Juilliard is making to it’s Musical Advancement Program (MAP), which serves low income students. The article also mentions cutbacks made to the Academy program, but doesn’t provide details.
This news comes on the heels of the Curtis Institute announcing a new facility. It’s a good example of the schizoid nature of the world, all challenge and opportunity, I guess. It’s big money flowing through the stimulus while all sorts of cuts are occurring across all sectors of the economy. It’s those institutions and organizations that will find ways to tap this flow of funding while other cut, cut, cut, and some fold up their tents.
Of course the cuts to MAP is a sad story, and you have to wonder whether or not the article will inspire an angel to make MAP whole.
What this tells us it that even the greatest of fundraising institutions are not immune, which of course we already knew by cutbacks announced at places like the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
The stimulus money won’t do much for MAP, I am sorry to say, not from what was given to the NEA, nor within the $100 billion for education. As for the Academy program, it’s remotely possible that the GIVE and SERVE bills might help out, although that’s a stretch.
Even with the stimulus funding coming to New York City public schools, the NYCDOE is talking right now about possible six percent cuts to the education budget. It’s hard to know how that projection will hold up, in either direction, as it appears that the city and state are still having trouble projecting income as the tax rolls continue to decline.
A friend and colleague wrote to me this morning about the Juilliard article, wondering if this was solely a matter of the economy, or whether this was related to arts education funders wanting to see more measurable results, which would be tied to performance on standardized tests in reading and math, and graduation rates.
While I don’t think that’s the case here. It’s an interesting question…