The Real Cost of Impact: Why the Arts—and the Facts—Matter

I’ve been following the conversation around the Regional Arts Commission audit, and I believe it’s important to ground this discussion in facts and a clearer understanding of how nonprofits actually operate.

Here is the letter I wrote to The St. Louis Post Dispatch:

As a fan and supporter of the Arts, I'm distressed by the accusations and misinformation flying around as a result of the Regional Arts Commission Audit.

The way I see it:
Administrative costs of nonprofits are often misunderstood and misrepresented. The work nonprofits do, the projects they accomplish are done by the professional staff. Salaries/benefits are the fuel that makes the work happen, that makes the community outcomes happen.

So the accusation that over 15% admin expenses is excessive is incorrect. Many quality organizations have expense ratios that are in the 20% range - which are still considered A-B quality rating by Charity Watch. More research shows that extremely low overhead costs can signal underinvestment in staff, systems, or compliance. Overall strong/high performing nonprofits have admin/fundraising expense under 25%.

The counter factual here - IE: what would be lost if RAC funding is removed:

• small theater companies and arts programs will lose critical funding and have to fold

• employment of thousands in the arts community will end

• arts programs for persons with disabilities will be cut or eliminated

In sum - a disaster for the Arts Ecosystem in St. Louis!

To politicians and leaders - please re-prioritize this rich resource in STL that contributes to attracting & retaining residents to our fine city!