As the new year is still fresh, we thought it would be a good time to RE-refresh minds on the program and introduce it to those of you who are newcomers to this blog. The MetLife/TCG Ah-ha! Program: Think It, Do It was created to encourage and foster creative thinking and action among TCG member theatres. A-ha! has two components: Think It grants (up to $25,000) give theatre professionals the time and space for research and development, and Do It grants (up to $50,000) support the implementation and testing of new ideas. Over 180 TCG Member Theatres submitted proposals for the second round of the program, and five of them received grants.
TCG is proud and delighted to present the second round of A-ha! recipients with a brief summary of their exciting projects. In addition, Jenny Millinger and Anthony Runfola of Childsplay give us an update of their project so far…
Visit us again to read more from this group of recipients while they share their process with the field as their projects move from thoughts to actions.
Think It!
Book-It Repertory Theatre will investigate the feasibility of a long-term partnership between Book-It and other non-profits to create a literacy-based theatre arts complex that nourishes their entire community.
Childsplay will convene experts from theatre design, manufacturing, recycling and sustainability to explore in depth strategies for implementing green initiatives (renew/reuse/recycle) in stagecraft.
East West Players proposes to develop an artist talent agency and diversity advocacy prototype, leveraging their theatre as a resource for performing opportunities and artistic career development and establish them as a resource for Asian Pacific American talent.
Salvage Vanguard Theater will undertake an exploratory process to develop and test a business plan for a production element co-op (scenic, lighting, costume) for small to mid-size companies in the Austin, Texas theater community.
Do It!
Clubbed Thumb seeks to partner with a larger theater to co-curate an upcoming production. Both partners will mutually choose, staff and cast a play to be produced at Clubbed Thumb’s June festival and then in a longer run at the larger theater.
***
Over the coming months, this blog will be updated with images, text, video, quotes – anything we can think of that might help the field learn from these projects. We want to share what’s working and what isn’t working.
Feel free to comment, email or interact with us and the recipients in any way you can think of! This blog is for you, the field!
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Welcome back to the Aha! Blog
Welcome back to the A-ha! blog: 2010 edition! To start the new year, Hayley Finn from the Playwrights Center reflects on their now-completed project:
We're so excited about the new round of Aha! Projects (you can get more information on them here) - keep an eye out for upcoming posts from this new group of recipients.
After launching our trailers on the website and sending DVDs of the trailers to artistic leaders across the country, we evaluated the initiative through surveys and conversations with theatre professionals. To recap, the goal of the project is to promote new plays by creating high-quality online video trailers. That means working from a treatment rather than recording a performance, and using a professional videographer, equipment, and editing to approximate a movie theater preview.
The response from our survey was for the most part very positive. Respondents called the project “an outstanding way to showcase the playwright’s work in such a short period of time,” “an excellent concept,” and “a succinct way to introduce me to a play.”
Some, however, felt that the trailers, shot on location in an apartment, a restaurant, and in New York City, were too far removed from the theater, and risked becoming their own short films. Similarly, some respondents felt that two to three minutes was too long for a teaser. And others wanted more of a sense of the narrative arc of the play.
We have been able to continue the project with the support of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Our challenge for Round Two, then, was to maintain the visual excitement of the first three trailers while emphasizing that these plays are designed for the stage and fully capable of living and breathing there. We put some rules in place for the next five trailers: they would be filmed in our theater, be one minute long, and give the viewer an idea of the play’s plotline/themes, and style rather than focusing on a single scene.
We’ve got three of the five “Round Two” trailers on the website now, and the next two are coming very soon. Once we have all five up we will be launching another server on our website and talking with people about their reactions to this revised format.
I invite you to view the trailer at http://www.pwcenter.org/trailers.php.
We're so excited about the new round of Aha! Projects (you can get more information on them here) - keep an eye out for upcoming posts from this new group of recipients.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Green Feedback!
Seema Sueko from Mo'Olelo invites your feedback on the latest version of the Green Theater Toolkit! (Available at http://www.tcg.org/pdfs/grants/Toolkits.pdf - be patient, it may take a moment to download.)
Hello Think it, Do it, Blog it readers:
We've posted the updated Green Theater Toolkit scorecards for Wood Products; Plastics and Foams; Metals; and Glass, Ceramics, Earthen Materials here. Please take a look and post your comments and feedback – feel free to be as direct as you wish with feedback. These scorecards aren't final, so your ideas will be extremely valuable to their development. If you don't feel comfortable posting your feedback on this public blog, you can email me directly at seema@moolelo.net (please write "Green Theater Toolkit" in the subject line).
Some questions for you to consider:
1) Do you understand the charts below?
2) Is any of this useful for your theater-making process?
3) Are there any materials you wish were on the list; or anything you wish were not on the list?
4) Are there any surprises for you on this list?
Thanks for taking the time to contribute to this project!
Aloha,
Seema Sueko
Artistic Director
Mo`olelo Performing Arts Company
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Notes from a Woolly Sabbatical
Tim Plant, Woolly Mammoth's Development Director, blogs his sabbatical experience:
My Aha! sabbatical experience thus far has been nothing short of fantastic. Thanks to the help of a Woolly Mammoth Board member to make the introduction, and the wonderful willingness of their staff, I’ve started my sabbatical at the Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC. My desire to learn from Sidwell Friends was simple – it’s recognized as one of the preeminent private schools in the country and the reputation of their Development team is well-known in the city.
Any nervousness I felt the first day (I hope it didn’t show) did not last for long. Mainly because we headed into meetings and didn’t look back from there. I’ve been shadowing Assistant Head of School for Institutional Advancement Patty Carocci and she’s allowed me to sit in on meetings ranging from how to use the database to track events, to planning for the next alumni magazine issue, to reviewing fiscal year-end plans. Her willingness to let me see how she manages every aspect of her job has been tremendous. Her responsibilities are obviously broader in scope than my position at Woolly (her staff is much larger than Woolly’s development team of three) so watching her manage the different parts has been instructive in how to handle my various responsibilities.
The rest of the Development team has also been incredibly generous with their time, whether it’s Leslie showing me all the reports used to track Annual Fund progress, or Lauren spending an hour sharing her experiences running the Sidwell Friends events. I truly feel like a sponge trying to soak up as much information, advice, and knowledge as I can.
The best part of the experience so far – and the hardest to convey – is the excitement that builds during my time there. I want to recreate Leslie’s “Yield” report, and look into adding an online portion of our auction similar to what Lauren described. And I want to do it today. On Monday, I posed a challenge I face in my job to Patty and she said, “Ok, we’re going to figure this out.” That willingness to dive into my work and share her experience is exactly what I hoped to gain from my time at Sidwell Friends. I’m going to be very sad indeed when my time visiting there is done. Thankfully, that’s not yet!
Friday, June 26, 2009
Mo'Olelo: Green Guidelines!
Seema Sueko from Mo'Olelo Performing Arts Company recently checked in about the progress of Mo'Olelo's Aha! project: the Green Theater Choices Toolkit Scorecard. If it all looks a little technical, don't worry, she enlisted the help of Eric Wilmanns of Brown & Wilmanns Environmental to help out with some handy definitions. 
We have a proto-type for the Green Theater Choices Toolkit Scorecard!
Alright, so what is all this stuff? We worked with our Scenic Designer David F. Weiner and the consultants from Brown & Wilmanns Environmental Consulting to evaluate a variety of materials used in scenic design and rate them according to three focus areas: Material, Human Health and End of Show Fate. The above proto-type is just a look at woods. We'll be creating scorecards for metals, foams & plastics, textiles, and a few other areas. This woods scorecard is also not quite done. We're working on making it more user-friendly for designers. I asked Eric Wilmanns of B&W to provide us with some definitions for each of the focus areas. Here's what he shared:
Material
This is an overview of how the material fairs when you consider its total life-cycle impacts. We take into account the conditions and environmental impacts associated with obtaining the basic raw materials, e.g. oil and natural gas, forest management and harvesting, mining, agricultural production etc. We also consider human social issues that effect the production of raw materials, manufacturing, use and end-of-life on affected communities and cultures. We consider the relative amount of energy required for obtaining and manufacturing the product as well as associated green house gas considerations. Note that many of these factors and indicators we rank by qualitative vs. quantitative means. So we might not have absolute numbers for each material in each category – but where we do have numbers we use them.
Human Health
For this focus we look specifically at the human health effects of the manufacture and use of a given material. We consider both acute and chronic health concerns and also if materials or compounds used in the life cycle of the product are carcinogenic or may cause reproductive effects or mimic hormones in the human body (endocrine disruptors). This may sound super science focused and to a large degree we try to do just that. We give more weight to a compound that has issues that can affect the end user but we also look up and downstream in the products life to see if workers are affected there too.
End of Show Fate
We typically call this parameter “end-of-life” but end of show seems more relevant for this project. Here we address the potential for reuse, recycle and reclamation and the potential impacts associated with reuse and/or recycling, land filling and/or incineration.
We have a proto-type for the Green Theater Choices Toolkit Scorecard!
Alright, so what is all this stuff? We worked with our Scenic Designer David F. Weiner and the consultants from Brown & Wilmanns Environmental Consulting to evaluate a variety of materials used in scenic design and rate them according to three focus areas: Material, Human Health and End of Show Fate. The above proto-type is just a look at woods. We'll be creating scorecards for metals, foams & plastics, textiles, and a few other areas. This woods scorecard is also not quite done. We're working on making it more user-friendly for designers. I asked Eric Wilmanns of B&W to provide us with some definitions for each of the focus areas. Here's what he shared:
Material
This is an overview of how the material fairs when you consider its total life-cycle impacts. We take into account the conditions and environmental impacts associated with obtaining the basic raw materials, e.g. oil and natural gas, forest management and harvesting, mining, agricultural production etc. We also consider human social issues that effect the production of raw materials, manufacturing, use and end-of-life on affected communities and cultures. We consider the relative amount of energy required for obtaining and manufacturing the product as well as associated green house gas considerations. Note that many of these factors and indicators we rank by qualitative vs. quantitative means. So we might not have absolute numbers for each material in each category – but where we do have numbers we use them.
Human Health
For this focus we look specifically at the human health effects of the manufacture and use of a given material. We consider both acute and chronic health concerns and also if materials or compounds used in the life cycle of the product are carcinogenic or may cause reproductive effects or mimic hormones in the human body (endocrine disruptors). This may sound super science focused and to a large degree we try to do just that. We give more weight to a compound that has issues that can affect the end user but we also look up and downstream in the products life to see if workers are affected there too.
End of Show Fate
We typically call this parameter “end-of-life” but end of show seems more relevant for this project. Here we address the potential for reuse, recycle and reclamation and the potential impacts associated with reuse and/or recycling, land filling and/or incineration.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Woolly Mammoth: If at First...
As we all know, things don’t always go according to plan, no matter how perfect an idea seems. Washington, D.C.’s Woolly Mammoth has been working hard on sending staff members out on their Aha! sabbaticals, which has proven to be more challenging than anticipated. Woolly’s Aaron Heinsman goes into detail…
At Woolly, literally everyone can have an impact on the art. So it seemed a no-brainer for us to send each of our full-time staff members out into the wider world to do a working sabbatical to glean new ideas and pick-up best practice insights at operations perhaps outside the regular purview of our theatrical network.
Easier said than done! It's proved especially challenging for us to arrange our sabbaticals, as we're attempting to reach out to new companies and organizations where we don't necessarily already have a relationship. But sadly opening these doors has not been as easy as we hoped. While there is enthusiasm for the program's concept, not everyone is willing or able to house one of our staffers. But the Woolly spirit is to keep trying until we figure it out!
And now the good news: we've gotten our first placement secured! Development Director Tim Plant is going back to school, and in this case he'll be in some pretty good company at DC's Sidwell Friends School. He'll glean some ideas and best practices for keeping alumni and their families connected to an organization long after the immediate relationship ends. This is particularly compelling for the Washington arts scene as the District frequently has a sizable residential turnover with each majority swing. Can a modestly sized theater -- where so much of the connection of patrons involves them actually experiencing our plays -- keep donor relationships going once they're not attending regularly or even still in the region? An intriguing question, and one we hope we'll soon be able to successfully answer affirmatively.
As for the rest of the staff, people are FIRED UP to get out there this summer, particularly as our colossal Season 30 will be soon upon us! Our props master wants to get her hands dirty at an FX house, our operations/company manager wants to see how the talent is managed at the D.C. United football club, and I am hoping to observe corporate philanthropy in action at the Whole Foods Foundation in Austin. Fingers crossed!
At Woolly, literally everyone can have an impact on the art. So it seemed a no-brainer for us to send each of our full-time staff members out into the wider world to do a working sabbatical to glean new ideas and pick-up best practice insights at operations perhaps outside the regular purview of our theatrical network.
Easier said than done! It's proved especially challenging for us to arrange our sabbaticals, as we're attempting to reach out to new companies and organizations where we don't necessarily already have a relationship. But sadly opening these doors has not been as easy as we hoped. While there is enthusiasm for the program's concept, not everyone is willing or able to house one of our staffers. But the Woolly spirit is to keep trying until we figure it out!
And now the good news: we've gotten our first placement secured! Development Director Tim Plant is going back to school, and in this case he'll be in some pretty good company at DC's Sidwell Friends School. He'll glean some ideas and best practices for keeping alumni and their families connected to an organization long after the immediate relationship ends. This is particularly compelling for the Washington arts scene as the District frequently has a sizable residential turnover with each majority swing. Can a modestly sized theater -- where so much of the connection of patrons involves them actually experiencing our plays -- keep donor relationships going once they're not attending regularly or even still in the region? An intriguing question, and one we hope we'll soon be able to successfully answer affirmatively.
As for the rest of the staff, people are FIRED UP to get out there this summer, particularly as our colossal Season 30 will be soon upon us! Our props master wants to get her hands dirty at an FX house, our operations/company manager wants to see how the talent is managed at the D.C. United football club, and I am hoping to observe corporate philanthropy in action at the Whole Foods Foundation in Austin. Fingers crossed!
Thursday, May 21, 2009
New Models; New Challenges
Here on the Aha! Blog, we strive to bring you the whole truth about the Aha! projects, from success to challenge to total conceptual reboot.
Take, for example, Theater Grottesco’s original concept of creating an LLC as an alternative capital campaign. Well, it turns out that SEC (the Securities and Exchange Commission) laws and regulations limit partners in an LLC to 35 people, each with a net worth of $1,000,000 or more, not including their homes. Suddenly the idea of offering shares to anyone with a spare $1,000 and an interest in downtown Santa Fe real estate seems pretty impractical.
But in true Aha! spirit, Grottesco has some new ideas:
In Model 1, a small group of partners invests substantial funding that is paid back with modest interest in 7-15 years. Investor motivation is less about return than community investment. However, in the current economy, this may present a more lucrative opportunity than standard securities or real estate. And the investments are understood to be risky. They may be transferred to a chosen non-profit organization as a tax-deduction as needed. Initial investments become a challenge to the general public to donate to the project in a conventional capital campaign. A third stage encourages volunteers to help build under the supervision of a licensed and insured contractor.
Model 2 is based upon the Calvert Community Investment model. A 501c3 solicits loans (not investments) of any size which are paid back with modest interest in 7-10 years. A 2nd campaign is then waged to repay the loans, a daunting prospect. On the other hand, with the low-interest loans, a theater could be created and we would be in a much stronger position to raise money the second time around.
Take, for example, Theater Grottesco’s original concept of creating an LLC as an alternative capital campaign. Well, it turns out that SEC (the Securities and Exchange Commission) laws and regulations limit partners in an LLC to 35 people, each with a net worth of $1,000,000 or more, not including their homes. Suddenly the idea of offering shares to anyone with a spare $1,000 and an interest in downtown Santa Fe real estate seems pretty impractical.
But in true Aha! spirit, Grottesco has some new ideas:
In Model 1, a small group of partners invests substantial funding that is paid back with modest interest in 7-15 years. Investor motivation is less about return than community investment. However, in the current economy, this may present a more lucrative opportunity than standard securities or real estate. And the investments are understood to be risky. They may be transferred to a chosen non-profit organization as a tax-deduction as needed. Initial investments become a challenge to the general public to donate to the project in a conventional capital campaign. A third stage encourages volunteers to help build under the supervision of a licensed and insured contractor.
Model 2 is based upon the Calvert Community Investment model. A 501c3 solicits loans (not investments) of any size which are paid back with modest interest in 7-10 years. A 2nd campaign is then waged to repay the loans, a daunting prospect. On the other hand, with the low-interest loans, a theater could be created and we would be in a much stronger position to raise money the second time around.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
