Wisconsin Arts Board told federal grant is intact but uncertainty could affect next year’s budget

At a Wisconsin Arts Board meeting, board members heard that the agency’s current federal-state partnership award for the coming year is approved but that future funding and program delivery face operational risk because of ongoing federal budget uncertainty and recent federal staffing changes.

Board members and staff said the board received an NEA partnership award for the state program (the board’s federal–state grant) and that the award amount for the current federal fiscal cycle is $1,083,000. The NEA also offered up to $75,000 in one-time funding for arts-and-health work and an additional one‑time $25,000 allocation tied to America’s 250 celebration; state staff said the agency had asked whether it wanted the one‑time funds and accepted them to support local programming.

The funding news arrived amid concern about the federal budget process. George Sugross, executive director of the Wisconsin Arts Board, described the timing and paperwork of federal awards as “confusing” given the federal fiscal calendar, agency buyouts and a contested federal budget. Board members discussed how recent federal staffing reductions at the National Endowment for the Arts and other cultural agencies increase processing delays for grants and drawdowns.

“The NEA is fine,” a board speaker said during the meeting in reference to the immediate award, but meeting discussion underscored that the presidential budget proposal and congressional action over the coming months could change future appropriations. Board members noted the difference between the president’s proposal and Congress’s authority to set funding levels.

State-level risks were also outlined. Department of Administration (DOA) staff shifted certain indirect costs between federal and state budget lines in prior years so the state share covers some overhead; board staff warned that if federal funds were reduced, the agency’s ability to support travel, hardware and grant administration could be constrained even though three state-funded staff positions remain allocated.

Board members and staff raised administrative concerns about the federal payment system used to draw down funds. Staff described intermittent outages and a burdensome “defend-to-spend” justification process tied to each drawdown; those extra steps can slow reimbursements and create additional audit exposure. To reduce exposure, staff recommended prioritizing use of federal dollars while preserving state dollars for obligations that must be spent by the state fiscal year end (June 30).

Board members also discussed advocacy work at the state level. Members reported outreach to the speaker’s office and to Rep. Novak and said that recent visibility for arts and film funding had helped keep proposed increases in the state biennial budget visible to lawmakers. They cautioned, however, that final appropriations remain unsettled until the legislature completes its process.

Board members noted short-term mitigation measures that have emerged in the field: private foundations and national partners have provided one‑time support for terminated or at-risk projects, and state humanities partners received Mellon Foundation emergency funding to bridge the current funding gap. Board staff said those private contributions help in the short term but cannot replace sustained federal or state funding.

Board members did not vote on a budget change at the meeting; they discussed next steps for planning and outreach and asked staff to continue monitoring federal award notices, drawdown capability and state appropriation activity.

The board’s discussion emphasized three near-term actions: (1) continue drawing down federal awards as appropriate while documenting justifications for each payment, (2) continue state advocacy for the biennial increase that has been proposed, and (3) prepare appeals or contingency communications for any state recipients affected if federal awards are revised.