I think what Ian might be saying, Reiner, is that community outreach can (like so many other things) become a box to tick, and shouldn't become such an end in itself that any organisation doing such work is automatically assumed to be deserving of funding.

Of course the Brahms Clarinet Quintet is equally valuable played in all the contexts you mention, but that's not always likely to be the point of comparison: how would you evaluate, for example, the funding claims of a chamber ensemble playing Brahms in the Wigmore Hall but doing no outreach, as against an ensemble doing outreach but applying no real standards of artistic merit on repertoire?

(though this was not addressed to me) In the current musical environment, the answer is indeed clear.  However, if such activities were mandated, I think the same situation would seem a lot less clear-cut.    I personally think such a mandate might not at all be a bad idea (in principle).

Are there any official bodies who facilitate outreach work for individual performers in the UK?

So: is this really the surely most important part of things?  In my mind it is, but it doesn't by any mean cancel out other considerations.  Would be interesting to know what the official stance is on this (outreach).  Anyone?

Non-argument.

Based on hyopthetical gossip that the quality of the education program has "no real standards of artistic merit on repertoire".

This is tittle-tattle, and deserves to be treated as such.

In point of fact ACE has a department of staff with specific training in the development, content, quality, scale and resultant value of such work.  The standards applied are extremely taxing,  and if standards and targets are not met, then grant-in-aid can be reduced or cancelled entirely.


Most of the Regional Arts Associations who deliver ACE funds to regional applicants actively support outreach work of exactly this kind.


Perhaps you could illustrate this suspicion of yours with specific examples - from the criteria, for example, or with reference to a case where "creation", "innovation" "etc" have proved to be suspect,  yet funding has continued for shabby work?  I'm sure we'd all like to know about these cases.


Perhaps being cited by the Arts Council as an example of "best practice" would suit? 

So, I did some digging there, on the irish and english arts councils' websites.

Irish:
Seem not to formally emphasise outreach in their grant application forms, they say that there must be some performative, or public, aspect to the work being funded, but that's it.

British:
The five assessment criteria are as follows:


So the logical next place to look is in their list of aims.


(Oh, the Arts Council have an official document about the freedom of information act and funding proposals here. The quote salient to our previous discussion is:

I don't know how this interacts with the actual FoI act, but I have no particular gripe with it, as I've explained earlier.)

Ah, thanks.  Their web-page will be my next stop then!

Absolutely. With respect to the question at the end of the first paragraph at all, if the first answer is applicable (or, for that matter, actually if it's the second), immediately other questions are raised about what we define as 'great music' (I naturally would call Brahms's Clarinet Quintet that, but am well aware others might disagree, for reasons not only to do with whether they specifically like Brahms or not, but also possibly from a viewpoint of scepticism towards the 'greatness' claims made for the Western canon) and as such why the money is better spent on this sort of activity than, say, on giving resources to allow young bands to play at the same venues? And that's a question I certainly don't find easy to answer, much though I would like to see Brahms and other classical music continue to be played at the widest range of different venues.

I think I'd generalise it a bit further - that they are doing something of real value in an environment where that thing would not be available without some sort of support.

... which (sorry to bang on about this, but it's an important point I think) doesn't really answer the question raised by my 'thought-experiment': Would the claim for value you are making on their behalf be sustained (a) if you removed the 'thing of real value' clause but retained the 'environment where that thing would not be otherwise be available' clause; (b) if you removed the latter clause but retained the former (which would equate to an argument for removing or reducing the weight of outreach as a criterion for funding)?

It's a bit different here, where we have the Scottish Arts Council, rather than ACE, and the priorities are very different, but my limited experience of the outreach work here is that it's treated very seriously: the RSNO's recent week in Angus with ensembles from duets right up to small symphony orchestra, appearing in schools and rest homes as well as theatres, churches and halls had a major coverage and several sell-outs, including the one at Arbroath, where on site research suggested that many of the audience were attending a classical concert for the first time. In one concert they shared the programme with instrumentalists from two local schools; the final items on the programme were played by combined amateur and professional forces.

In some ways outreach has to do the job formerly done by schools and the media; classical music hardly reaches the lives of a huge proportion of the population at all now save through the odd advert or movie; more and more people know it as a purely passive exercise, with no chance to participate at even a basic level. Those who have had performing experience of music, even if it's just the chance to sing in a choir, are likelier to be affected at a deeper level, and also to have decreased resistance....

Incidentally, the other huge difference between here and Down South is our National Theatre: we do have one, though it's not a building or even a company, but rather an organisation for partnership with existing companies and funding for new experiments in everything from large-scale classical theatre to the continuation of Scotland's tradition for radical, small-scale touring companies specialising in political theatre. One of their first successes was the multi-award winning Black Watch, a searing exploration of the trials and tribulations of war: it's out on tour now, and playing the Barbican later this year (click the banner on the NTS site).

http://www.nationaltheatrescotland.com/content/