E.3.2.c. Fund-raising

Fund-raising is a critical aspect of the economic aspect of sustainability, which has been identified as the highest principle for the AC ecosystem. The concept of sustainability has been addressed in section B.2. This concept is considered in both affective and economic terms. Since economic challenges are constantly present in the day to day practices of the partner organizations, and sustainability is also directly related to the sustainability of the organisms of the AC Ecosystem itself, the question of how or if the organization can sustain itself as the existing members become un-funded is uncertain. Therefore, a clear position regarding the future is necessary to define. As a step in this direction, in order to address the issue of funding for the AC as an organization, in the assembly in Kyrgyzstan, it was decided that a fundraising group be established to look at how this task might be accomplished within the decentralized structure which is the AC ecosystem.

While the fundraising guidelines outline many if not all of the typical actions involved in fundraising. It is not clear which, if any, direct fundraising process will be implemented, for the AC as an organization. It is also not clear how groups of organizations might apply for specific project funding under the AC “umbrella.”

The guidelines correctly identify the critical relationships between this working group and other working groups that will be required in order to develop a coherent position based on the consensus of the AC members.

It is clear that part of the process for determining which potential funders to approach should involve the use of the Cascade of Coherence.

Unresolved Questions:

How does AC see itself after the 5 years of support for the current members?

What is AC’s philosophical stand in regards to the language it could use to communicate what it does with others and the relations it could form. This unresolved question is especially acute in relation to fundraising. It could be grossly formulated in these terms:

Does AC want to maintain a radical position in regards to the use of language and refuse to communicate using “traditional” referents such as impact and audience building or would AC accept to still play the “traditional” game while making its position clear and using a language that could be seen as “simplified” but could be used as an entry point for funders and/ or communication purposes.

In other words, how do we portray ourselves in a non-obscure way, in a way that is open to others, using a language that could be understood without betraying ourselves and our principles?

What is the AC position regarding the concept of the impact of the AC network on a local and global scale? Should this even be considered? If so, how should this be presented?

As a group we need to clarify our position about this and whether we want to try to quantify our individual and collective impacts in the traditional sense, and/or if we want to use qualitative impact measures, or both, or if we want to use any kind of impact measures at all etc.

Are some or all of the organizations interested in project funding as opposed to, or in addition to, structural or administrative funding?

How might we form groups of organizations that might request funding in order to realize a collective project? Is this related to the existing mechanisms that we have; Bangas, ETP’s, etc.?

If some organizations decide that they want to participate in such a collective project how can they take advantage of being part of the AC to secure funding? How can they or should they contribute to the AC common pot if the funding is awarded and the project is realized?

This is related to the question of the Legal Entity, which we still need to solve, but some basic questions related to fundraising also have to do with identifying our individual and collective strengths and impacts and agreeing on ways to communicate them to potential funders. This is also related to our ethical principles and brings up questions about developing new relationships or continuing existing relationships with organizations who work with and within the constraints of the capitalist system (including the art world and art market).