FUNDING WITHOUT FOOTPRINTS

Rethinking Accountability in South Africa’s Cultural and Creative Industries

Funding remains one of the most contested and emotional subjects in South Africa’s Cultural and Creative Industries. 

Each funding cycle brings hope, relief, frustration, celebration, and disappointment — often all at once. Yet beyond the scramble for applications and outcomes, a deeper question lingers: 

What happens after the money is awarded?

If public funds are meant to grow the sector, create jobs, and expand access, then visibility, accountability, and impact cannot be optional extras. 

They must be central to how funded work is conceived, implemented, and reported.

This article is not about blame alone. It is about responsibility — shared responsibility.

                         Image: DSAC Logo

    (Source: DSAC) 

Public Money, Public Visibility

The Importance of Branding, Publicity and Marketing

Every funded project is not just a private activity; it is a public investment. 

Branding, publicity, and marketing are not cosmetic expenses — they are evidence that work is happening, audiences are being reached, and value is being created.

Yet across the sector, we repeatedly see projects that receive funding but leave little or no public trace:

• No posters

• No banners

• No social media presence

• No press releases

• No photographic or video documentation

This raises uncomfortable but necessary questions:

• Are these projects truly taking place?

• Or are reports being written without corresponding public activity?

• How does the public benefit from work it never sees, hears about, or experiences?

In some cases, projects struggle to allocate even a few hundred rand for basic branding. What message does this send about professionalism, planning, and respect for audiences?

                         Image: NFVF Logo

    (Source: NFVF) 

The Silence After Funding Approval

Where Are the Funded Projects?

Each year, millions of rands are allocated to cultural projects across the country. Yet very few of these projects are visible beyond the final report submitted to a funding body.

This absence hurts the sector in multiple ways:

• Audiences remain unaware of funded cultural activity

• Artists miss opportunities for exposure and growth

• Funders struggle to demonstrate impact to the public

• The sector appears inactive despite significant investment

If funded work is invisible, how do we build public trust in arts funding?

                          Image: MGE Logo

    (Source: DSAC) 

Job Creation: Numbers vs Reality

Are We Doing Justice to Job Opportunities?

Funding guidelines often emphasise job creation, but this concept is frequently reduced to numbers on a form rather than lived experience.

We must ask:

• What kinds of jobs are being created?

• Are these short-term, underpaid, or unpaid “opportunities”?

• Do contracts reflect fair labour practices?

• Are young practitioners gaining skills, or simply being used to meet targets?

Job creation must mean more than ticking a compliance box. It must reflect dignity, fairness, skills transfer, and sustainability.

Those who receive funding carry a responsibility not only to create jobs, but to create just jobs.

                          Image: PESP Logo

    (Source: SA Government) 

Reporting Failures and the Second Tranche Problem

It is widely reported that many beneficiaries fail to receive their second tranche payments, often due to poor reporting, inadequate documentation, or non-compliance.

This raises difficult questions:

• Do funding institutions adequately prepare beneficiaries for reporting requirements?

• Or do beneficiaries underestimate the seriousness of compliance?

At what point do we stop externalising blame and begin strengthening our own administrative capacity?

                          Image: NAC Logo

    (Source: NAC) 

Transparency Questions the Sector Is Afraid to Ask

Perhaps the most uncomfortable questions are the ones rarely asked publicly:

• Would it assist the sector if funding institutions published a list of organisations and individuals who never received their second tranche payments?

• What happens to the funds that are never claimed due to non-compliance?

• Do these funds automatically return to the National Treasury?

• Or do funding institutions have discretionary mechanisms that benefit from these unclaimed allocations?

Transparency on these issues would not weaken institutions — it would strengthen public trust and encourage better practice across the sector.

                          Image: NHC Logo

    (Source: DSAC) 

Shared Accountability, Not Selective Outrage

It is easy to blame funding institutions when outcomes are unfavourable. It is harder — but necessary — to reflect honestly on our own practices as beneficiaries.

Professionalism is not imposed by funders alone. It is demonstrated through:

• Proper planning

• Clear communication

• Visible implementation

• Ethical employment practices

• Accurate and honest reporting

If we want a sector that is respected, regulated, and resourced, then accountability must flow in all directions.

                    Image: Sector Clusters 

    (Source: DSAC) 

A Call to Engage, Not Deflect

Funding should not end at disbursement. It should initiate a cycle of visibility, learning, correction, and growth.

This is an invitation to the sector:

• To talk openly about failures, not hide them

• To demand transparency from institutions while practising it ourselves

• To treat public funds with the seriousness they deserve

The future of cultural funding depends not only on how much money is available — but on how responsibly it is used, documented, and made visible.

Let’s engage.

The Creative Passport is an independent platform focused on Arts, Culture and the Creative Industries. Readers are encouraged to follow, comment and engage constructively.

HOW TO FOLLOW THE CREATIVE PASSPORT

RECEIVE POSTS BY EMAILS