We welcome the much-anticipated publication of Baroness Margaret Hodge's independent review of Arts Council England, and are specifically pleased that it calls for a ‘ground-up’ approach to culture to support underserved communities across England.

We are also delighted that Hodge recommends that “ACE needs to find more ways to galvanise [local] artists and help them work with their communities to build up a cultural offer from the ground up.” The review also states that “every community boasts artists!”, a sentiment that Creative Lives has championed for over 30 years. 

We were also pleased to read that the review recognises the crucial work of Arts Council England as a vital arms-length body, and that Hodge highlights the crucial work executed by ACE via the Creative People Places programme.

The Hodge review: what works for community creative groups, what might be a hindrance, and what is missing altogether?

A real ground-up approach, and a drive for increased local decision-making that will support local creative groups to thrive:
We welcome Hodge’s recommendations for a ground-up approach, and we note the review's emphasis that "[the] programme must be owned by the community it represents." This principle of community ownership is central to Creative Lives’ approach and the groups we represent, and we are pleased to see it recognised as fundamental to success.

However, the idea of employing two artists in each area seems overly prescriptive. It is not just the role of professional artists to contribute to local culture, but also that of organisers, curators, hobbyists, amateur musicians and audiences, as well as businesses and consumers. However the principle is sound and we look forward to working with ACE on future implementation of such a scheme.
 
Local Authorities must be resourced to deliver on culture:
We fully support the idea that Local Authorities should have a statutory obligation to support culture. However, as the Local Government Association points out, there must be adequate resources to deliver on culture locally, not just strategies that can’t be implemented. 

Replacing ‘Let’s Create’ in its entirety is a step backwards:
While we agree that the implementation of the investment principles of Let’s Create is overburdensome, we urge that the hard-fought-for commitments to people, place and communities aren’t diluted. As David Micklem’s blog points out: “Let’s Create has contributed to a seismic shift in attitudes to art – who it is for, who gets to make it, how it is made”, and this should not be lost. 

Excellent community and voluntary creative activity and output must be recognised, not sidelined, polarised or viewed as box ticking:
Excellence needs to be defined by artistic and organisational objectives, not cultural gatekeepers. We are pleased that Hodge found that most people “recognised the importance of both extending participation in arts and cultural activities, [..] and providing opportunities for people in their local communities to experience arts and culture.” But the ambition for communities to ‘make’ and ‘create’ their own creative excellence mustn’t be sidelined.

The entire cultural ecosystem isn’t currently considered within the review: 
Geoff Crossick, Creative Lives Trustee, points out that the Terms of Reference for the review ask 'What is the role of ACE in the wider cultural ecosystem?' and that this has not been addressed within the review. He urges us to consider “commercial provision (virtually all film, streamed TV, games, music, literature) as well as the creative activities that people engage with in their everyday lives, as individuals or in groups.” Arts Council England has the potential to neglect activity that happens outside of its funded organisations, and therefore misses opportunities to shape, support and grow the whole ecosystem, which is interconnected.

Everyday creativity and health & wellbeing need to be considered:
We notice that the terms "volunteer-led creative groups" and “everyday creativity” do not appear anywhere in the review, despite forming the backbone of creative participation in most communities. 

In our evidence submission, we provided substantial data demonstrating the scale and significance of this sector. We encourage DCMS to give explicit recognition to the distinctive value of volunteer-led creative groups. These groups exist in almost every community, involve both mainstream and diverse populations, and demonstrate a remarkable ability to address isolation, poor health, community divisions and disempowerment. 

We also note that the review does not explicitly talk about the impact of creativity on health and wellbeing, or reducing loneliness in communities. And whilst we welcome the commitment to work with the Department for Education (DFE), if ‘place’ and ‘community’ are key components of the review, we must stress the importance of working with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) to deliver the desired outcomes.

Can ACE deliver as a development agency, and how can we ensure the expertise of Investment Principles Support Organisations (IPSO) and sector support is not lost?
A strengthened development agency role for Arts Council England, that includes working with organisations like Creative Lives alongside representative bodies and unfunded organisations, would enhance the sector's resilience. It would also ensure that policy and practice are informed by the full breadth of creative activity happening in communities. 

Creative Lives wants to be engaged as a strategic partner and as the national voice for volunteer-led creativity, not simply as a grant recipient. We were pleased to see the important work of IPSOs recognised in the review, however, Hodge’s suggestion that ACE could take on some of these development agency roles in-house risks specialist skills, expertise and crucially representation being lost, as ACE staff are already over-stretched.

Conclusion

Creative Lives stands ready to work with Arts Council England, DCMS, local authorities and sector partners to implement the relevant review recommendations and to ensure that local creative groups have the capacity, resilience and connections to enable them to work collaboratively towards solutions to local challenges.