Agenda item

To receive the annual report from Pallant House Gallery and assess performance in line with the monitoring framework.

The Committee considered this report circulated with the agenda.

Mrs Peyman was joined by Mr Simon Martin who presented the report and provided a summary of the year. 

Mr Martin expressed thanks to Mrs Pam Dignum, the Council’s previous representative on the Pallant House Gallery Board of Trustees and was delighted to have Mrs Apel as the Council’s new appointee. 

He outlined Pallant House Gallery’s annual report.  In particular he explained how children and young people were encouraged to visit the gallery and the range of incentives in place to encourage everyone to visit.  With regard to the art on view, the Gallery was trying to be more diverse in the types of paintings on display.  A number of the paintings were loaned out to other organisations in this Country and to other countries, which was a great advert for the Gallery.   With regard to financial governance, the 2018-2019 accounts were currently being audited. 

Mrs Peyman added that as part of the monitoring framework an annual report was reported to this Committee.  The Gallery’s funding was spilt into two tranches, being released on 1 April and 1 October each year, but was first subject to confirmation that the Arts Council England funding was in place.  Confirmation had been received that it was in place until 2022.  Paragraph 4.1 set out the activities and the required measurements to be achieved under the monitoring framework.   Mrs Peyman confirmed that having reviewed the monitoring framework she had no concerns with the performance of Pallant House Gallery, and advised that all the requirements appeared to be covered clearly in the report.

Members asked the following questions of Mr Martin:

-     We have heard some of the initiatives in place to attract young people.  Are there other initiatives in place for other age ranges?: Mr Martin advised that visitor numbers for older people were very good.  The initiatives for young people were in place as the Gallery struggled to attract this age group, as they were working, had less free time and a wide range of different choices of what to do with the spare time they did have.  It had been noticed that a key way to attract this age range was programming.  The contemporary artist Nick Goss had held his first museum exhibition at the Gallery, which had attracted younger people, largely through social media.  The post-impressionist Harold Gillman had attracted a different audience.  Having both these exhibitions at the Gallery at the same time had created a cross fertilisation as their exhibitions were, therefore, seen by both the young and old, creating a cross fertilisation.  The evening yoga was an opportunity to attract people who would not normally visit.   The ‘summer lates’ evenings were created to attract young people who often did not want formal learning experiences but were looking for different types of experiences.  The Gallery was also attracting younger families to take part in creative activities with their children.

-     How was the Gallery embracing new technology- In particular it was expected that Facebook’s proposal for a new digital currency ‘libra’ would attract young people? – Does the Gallery keep track of these developments and look to see if they could be made use of?:  The gallery employed a part time Communications Assistant on Facebook, twitter and Instagram. The Gallery was working with the Arts Council digital champion about investing in short films and digital screens had been installed in the reception area.  The Gallery was open to using holographic technology, but would depend on funding and if the issues concerning the Gallery’s physical structure could be overcome. 

-     Can the Community Workshops be taken on the road to community and youth groups?:  One of the roles of the Gallery’s Community Programme Manager was to look at what the Gallery could do on a long term sustained support basis and not make it a box ticking exercise.  An issue was the space available at the Gallery for workshops and the only way a lot of these could be undertaken was at a venue outside of the Gallery.  The Gallery had found that increasingly schools could no longer afford the transport costs.

-     With regard to the audience profiling report, was this representative of the District and if not what was the Gallery doing to reflect the ethnic balance of the District?:  The Gallery always tried to increase the diversity of the visitors, however, it was not easy, and what the Gallery tried to do was to create a place that was open and welcoming. The Gallery’s values were important to it, so that anyone who walks through the door felt welcome, and looked to remove any barriers.  The Chichester Access Group had recently undertaken a disability audit, which identified a number of actions that the Gallery was currently working on.  The Gallery had received a number of awards for its access when the new wing opened, but standards had changed over the last 12 years.  With regard to increasing the ethnicity of visitors, this was dependent on the Gallery’s funding and at the moment it was not able to work with as many groups as it wished to. 

-     How does the Gallery work with other organisations in the District?:  The Gallery worked with other organisations in various ways, including marketing partnerships.  The Gallery had reciprocal advertisements with Chichester Festival Theatre.  E-bulletin cross marketing took place.  Discussions were taking place with the Novium concerning an exhibition in two years’ time to mark a number of local arts anniversaries. He was a member of the Chichester Cathedral Fabric Advisory Committee.  The Gallery and the University of Chichester were putting together a memorandum of understanding to attract as much student use of the Gallery as possible, including student placements.  However, regrettably the closure of the Otter Gallery had slowed down developments, as the Gallery had been working with the students as part of its community programme.  The Gallery also worked with the Chichester College.  Further afield the Gallery was part of ‘Sussex Modern’ consisting of various organisations, including local organisations, such as West Dean and Cass Sculpture Foundation. The Gallery was also looking to work with the County Council on tourism initiatives, including an advertisement at Gatwick airport and other local attractions.  More was planned to move into cultural tourism with various discussions having taken place with Visit Chichester and Chichester BID.  The Chairman commented that it was important to build upon these opportunities.  Mrs Peyman added that as part of the Chichester Vision project, the Council will look into the formation of a  cultural partnership across the District to pull together networking, opportunities to set up marketing initiatives and outreach education initiatives.

-     Do you analyse how people travel to visit the Gallery and is the Gallery looking at becoming carbon neutral?:  The cycle racks were recently been put in place following a long delay by the County Council.   The use of public transport was encouraged.  The short visitor interviews often asked what their mode of transport to the Gallery had been.  The Galley took part in car free Chichester Day.  The Gallery had an Environmental Sustainability action plan.  The Gallery’s extension was the first public museum in this Country to have a geo thermal heating and cooling system.  All electricity used was now renewable and theGallery was in the process of changing its gas provider.  A plan was in place to replace the lighting from halogen to LED which would have a significant long term cost benefit, albeit with an initial cost investment.  With regard to the Museum’s purchase of the adjoining Coach House, the District Council’s planning officers had advised that solar panels were not permitted in a conservation area.  He suggested that this issue was something to be re-considered.

The Committee thanked both Mr Martin and Mrs Peyman for their excellent report. 

Mr Martin added that one of the issues the previous Council representative had been concerned with were the maintenance issues concerning Pallant House, which was a Grade I listed building.  Part of the Gallery and explained that over the last couple of years there had been issues with the roof leaking.   The District Council that was responsible for the exterior of the building and the Gallery for the interior.  But if the roof leaked it affected the interior maintenance.  He asked for a maintenance plan to be put in place to ensure the building was cared for in the future.  The Chairman advised that the matter would be looked into as soon as possible and officers would be in contact with their thoughts and ideas.

The Committee welcomed the open invitation from Mr Martin for a familiarisation visit to the Gallery over the summer.

RESOLVED

That the annual report from Pallant House Gallery be received and agree that performance is in line with the monitoring framework.</AI6>

<AI7>