In 2019, arts organizations in BIPOC-majority neighborhoods of a major U.S. city received 16% less median grant funding than those in white-majority neighborhoods. By 2022, they were receiving 289% more. Over three years, funding patterns that historically and systemically overlooked these marginalized communities shifted remarkably.

This progress wasn't accidental. It was the result of a deliberate, well-resourced funding initiative launched in the middle of national crises. And it raises a critical question for the philanthropic sector: Why did it take a crisis to prompt intentional investment, and how can it be sustained as political and economic landscapes present new challenges?

In 2020, as the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic had altered daily life for most, it also threatened the survival of nonprofit arts and cultural organizations nationwide. This crisis brought new perspective on how nonprofits were asked to spend their limited time and resources, and by summer of that year, this grew into a call for meaningful re-evaluation of responsive and equitable funding practices.

In the weeks that followed the murder of George Floyd, the Black Lives Matter social justice movement gained new prominence, spurring widespread calls for change that felt like an unstoppable force for societal progress. Over the next year, pressure on institutions to act on racial equity intensified.

The Ford Foundation responded with America's Cultural Treasures grant program (ACT) — a two-pronged funding initiative, national then regional, designed to recognize the diversity of artistic expression and to provide critical funding to arts organizations that had made significant cultural contributions despite historically limited resources.

Ford’s regional initiative ultimately engaged more than 40 funders and philanthropies and distributed more than $276 million. Each of the nine participating regions were empowered to design their own approach, with local foundations driving decisions about scope, grantees, and structure.

SMU DataArts, in partnership with Ted Russell Consulting, was asked to evaluate how this initiative affected investment patterns in practice. Beyond investigating just what the money accomplished, we assessed what the process revealed about how philanthropy can work differently, and what funders can carry forward from this moment to the next.

The Starting Point

Before ACT funding began flowing in 2021, the data told a relatively consistent story. Across the five ACT cities where neighborhood-level comparisons were possible — Chicago, Houston, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and Los Angeles — arts organizations in BIPOC-majority neighborhoods were receiving less median foundation funding than those in white-majority neighborhoods in all but one of these cities. Median funding levels for organizations in BIPOC-majority zip codes fell short of white-majority zip codes by 24% in Chicago, 21% in Houston, 16% in Pittsburgh, and 5% in Philadelphia. Los Angeles was the exception with median funding levels 96% higher in BIPOC-majority zip codes compared to white-majority.

These discrepancies weren’t just a reflection of organizational budgets. They reflected decades of accumulated funding decisions that had systemically underinvested in BIPOC neighborhoods — leaving residents with fewer arts resources per capita than city averages. ACT was a direct attempt to interrupt that pattern and recognize organizations that have made a significant impact on the American cultural landscape despite these resource limitations. The nine-region initiative included both city-based programs and broader geographic areas, but it’s in these five cities where consistent, comparable data makes it possible to clearly measure change.

By 2023, ACT grantees' organizational expenses had grown by an average of 34% compared to 2019. This growth represents real organizational capacity that didn’t exist before, and several regions saw even more dramatic growth. Grantees of First Americans’ Cultural Treasure with First Nations saw a change of 119% in expenses, BIPOC Arts Network and Fund in Houston grantees saw a change of 117%, and Southern Cultural Treasures with South Arts saw a change of 113%.

ACT’s impact during the grant term was real, but the investments made were temporary. Looking beyond the grant period, citywide funding patterns in the five comparable cities did shift modestly. Between 2019 and 2024 the proportion of total foundation dollars reaching BIPOC-majority neighborhoods increased slightly in four of the five regions but still fell short of parity. Widen the lens further to the national level, and the picture shifts again.

The National Snap-Back

In 2021, BIPOC-focused arts organizations saw a significant spike in revenue as funders across the sector responded to the urgency of that moment. By 2022, those patterns had reverted almost entirely to pre-pandemic trajectories. BIPOC-focused and general-mission organizations are now losing revenue at nearly the same pace, suggesting the exceptional conditions that drove relative gains have largely passed.

The uncomfortable truth that our research surfaces is this: the conditions that catalyzed rapid change toward more equitable funding practices were largely crisis-conditions. Urgency and public pressure to act loosened institutional norms but when those conditions faded, so did much of the momentum.

In contrast, funders who participated in the ACT initiative report lasting change in how they work. Stronger cross-funder relationships, broader familiarity with previously overlooked organizations, new tools for crisis response, and deeper experience with trust-based philanthropy were among the documented impacts.

The regional variation in ACT also matters here. Nine regions, nine different approaches from single-funder to full community-led structures produced different kinds of insights. That variation is a feature. It means many funders can find a model that fits their context rather than trying to replicate a single playbook.