Metro Arts Commission changes Thrive grant model, rescinds $10,000 cap and adopts 75% funding formula

The Metro Arts Commission voted on Jan. 16 to replace a $10,000 maximum award for Thrive grants with a funding formula that will fund awarded proposals at up to 75% of the applicant's requested amount and to rank awards by score until funds are exhausted.

The decision, made after an extended Grants and Funding Committee presentation and floor discussion, also instructs staff to perform a second review to break ties and says any remaining Thrive funds at the end of distribution will be divided evenly and added to awardees' totals. Commissioners voted to rescind a separate provision that would have prioritized projects located in underrepresented council districts for this grant cycle; the committee said it lacked the data to implement that policy fairly before the current deadline.

Why it matters: The commission moved to the new model to reduce the risk of a funding surplus and to preserve project integrity for applicants who designed budgets larger than the prior flat $10,000 award. Committee members said the change aims to get more of the approved funds into the field while still supporting substantive projects.

Commissioner Levkowitz, chair of the Grants and Funding Committee, told commissioners the committee considered the possibility of attrition among applicants and concluded that 75% of the requested amount was a reasonable middle ground. "The 75% is kind of a middle ground, between a $10,000 award and a fully funded project," she said during the meeting.

Tessa Ortiz of Metro Legal, who briefed commissioners earlier in the meeting on voting obligations and Robert's Rules, reviewed procedural implications of the amendments and confirmed staff may file the recommended amendments to the legislative packet with council if the commission approves them.

Director Tucker of the Metro Human Relations Commission appeared at the meeting to remind commissioners that the Thrive funding criteria represent the final outstanding portion of a conciliation agreement tied to a prior Title VI complaint. "As of to date, all aspects of the conciliation agreement have been met. The one that remains outstanding is the grant funding criteria," Director Tucker said, and she said MHRC stands behind the commission's proposed approach while noting operational concerns about staff participation in drafting the materials.

Commissioners discussed ancillary questions including whether grantees could accept less than their award and whether contracts could allow retroactive spending. Staff said applicants would be able to amend budgets during a short resubmission window; if a grantee receives an award larger than its revised budget, the contract would reflect the accepted amount rather than the larger award.

Key clarifying details contained in the motion and staff presentation: applicants may have requested up to $20,000; under the new rule, an awarded $20,000 request would be funded up to $15,000 (75%); staff will rank applicants by score and fund from highest to lowest until funds are exhausted; a short resubmission period will allow applicants to amend budgets and correct materials; the committee recommended rescinding priority for underrepresented council districts for this cycle because insufficient data exist to operationalize it fairly.

The commission combined several committee recommendations into a single motion and approved it by voice and roll-call vote. The motion passed. Commissioners also adopted an accelerated timeline to move review, contract execution and payments earlier in the calendar so artists could receive funds sooner.

What comes next: Commissioner Levkowitz was authorized to work with staff to make final edits to the legislative packet to meet the council filing deadline. Staff and the committee plan to re-open the applications to awardees for limited edits and to publish an amended timeline for award decisions and contracting.

Ending: The commission's actions change the mechanics of this grant cycle but preserve scoring and project review. Commissioners said they intend to revisit district-priority policy in future cycles after compiling more data.