Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Gogo Fund topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Go‑Go leaders press agency for 'seat at the table' and clearer Go Go Fund process
Summary
Longstanding Go‑Go community members told the Committee on Human Services they want clearer application criteria, more transparent scoring, and direct inclusion in program planning for the Go Go Support Fund; OCTFME said it will expand outreach and training and noted 66 of 68 applicants in FY25 received resources.
Several longtime participants in Washington's Go‑Go community urged the Committee on Human Services on Feb. 5 to improve transparency and include community leaders in program design and funding decisions for the Go Go Support Fund.
"Gogo should be ran by Gogo people," said Terence Cooper, president of the United Go Go Association, urging a formal role for community representatives in developing programs and deciding priorities. Musicians and organizers described feeling excluded in earlier rounds of funding and asked for clearer guidance about scoring and eligibility so smaller and independent artists have a fair chance.
Joseph Jackson, owner of GoGo Ventures and the owner of a Go Go‑specific distribution platform, said money and opportunities were not broadly communicated when the fund launched: "They just didn't say anything," he told the committee, arguing that scoring and selection criteria should be public so applicants can submit stronger applications. OCTFME Director Latoya Foster responded that the agency posts criteria and has conducted outreach through newsletters, community meetings, social media, and partnerships (including with DC Public Library) and that staff have done one‑on‑one application assistance.
Agency staff said the Go Go Fund has broad allowable uses—performances, education, archival projects and activations—and noted that in FY25 68 applications were received and 66 received some resources. The agency also said it plans to expand applicant training and work with community partners so applicants better understand requirements such as clean‑hands certification and budget materials.
Committee members called for continued outreach, publicly available scoring guidance, and follow‑up detail on any activations or grants made outside the portal, and asked OCTFME to provide a consolidated list of portal and non‑portal support to ensure clarity.
