This study documents controversies that have arisen from federally funded art programs and organizations and explores the actions taken by the government and changes made to public policy in the wake of said controversies. These actions include (1) requiring matching funding from other entities, (2) reorganization of programs, changing names of programs, and/or the elimination of programs, (3) oaths/pledges from artists/arts organizations, (4) the denial of funding, (5) the delegation of responsibility/requiring advising panels, and (6) the change or destruction of art. This paper focuses on two federal agencies: the Federal One Program of the Works Progress Administration (1935- 1943) and the National Endowment for the Arts (1965- present). Another example is presented from the General Service Administration’s (GSA) Art-in-Architecture program. The intention of this study is to present federal art funding advocates and policy-makers with information that is useful in the formulation and administration of policy.
","abstract_html":"<p>This study documents controversies that have arisen from federally funded art programs and organizations and explores the actions taken by the government and changes made to public policy in the wake of said controversies. These actions include (1) requiring matching funding from other entities, (2) reorganization of programs, changing names of programs, and/or the elimination of programs, (3) oaths/pledges from artists/arts organizations, (4) the denial of funding, (5) the delegation of responsibility/requiring advising panels, and (6) the change or destruction of art. This paper focuses on two federal agencies: the Federal One Program of the Works Progress Administration (1935- 1943) and the National Endowment for the Arts (1965- present). Another example is presented from the General Service Administration’s (GSA) Art-in-Architecture program. The intention of this study is to present federal art funding advocates and policy-makers with information that is useful in the formulation and administration of policy.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Kalbfleisch, Abby Lauren"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Arts (MA)","degree_level":"Open Access Thesis","degree_discipline":"Communication, Media and Theatre Arts","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Ken Stevens, Chair","Susan Booth","Melanie Schuessler"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2013,"date_issued":"2013-03-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2013-03-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:16:51Z","subjects":["Art programs","funding","finance","art","WPA","Art and Design"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://commons.emich.edu/theses/456","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Ken Stevens, Chair","Susan Booth","Melanie Schuessler"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Kalbfleisch, Abby Lauren"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2013-05-09T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Communication, Media and Theatre Arts"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Open Access Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts (MA)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Art programs","funding","finance","art","WPA","Art and Design"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://commons.emich.edu/theses/456"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This study documents controversies that have arisen from federally funded art programs and organizations and explores the actions taken by the government and changes made to public policy in the wake of said controversies. These actions include (1) requiring matching funding from other entities, (2) reorganization of programs, changing names of programs, and/or the elimination of programs, (3) oaths/pledges from artists/arts organizations, (4) the denial of funding, (5) the delegation of responsibility/requiring advising panels, and (6) the change or destruction of art. This paper focuses on two federal agencies: the Federal One Program of the Works Progress Administration (1935- 1943) and the National Endowment for the Arts (1965- present). Another example is presented from the General Service Administration’s (GSA) Art-in-Architecture program. The intention of this study is to present federal art funding advocates and policy-makers with information that is useful in the formulation and administration of policy.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Federally funded art in the United States: Government actions in response to controversy"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Ken Stevens, Chair","Susan Booth","Melanie Schuessler"],"dc:creator":["Kalbfleisch, Abby Lauren"],"dc:date.available":["2013-05-09T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["This study documents controversies that have arisen from federally funded art programs and organizations and explores the actions taken by the government and changes made to public policy in the wake of said controversies. These actions include (1) requiring matching funding from other entities, (2) reorganization of programs, changing names of programs, and/or the elimination of programs, (3) oaths/pledges from artists/arts organizations, (4) the denial of funding, (5) the delegation of responsibility/requiring advising panels, and (6) the change or destruction of art. This paper focuses on two federal agencies: the Federal One Program of the Works Progress Administration (1935- 1943) and the National Endowment for the Arts (1965- present). Another example is presented from the General Service Administration’s (GSA) Art-in-Architecture program. The intention of this study is to present federal art funding advocates and policy-makers with information that is useful in the formulation and administration of policy.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://commons.emich.edu/theses/456"],"dc:subject":["Art programs","funding","finance","art","WPA","Art and Design"],"dc:title":["Federally funded art in the United States: Government actions in response to controversy"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Communication, Media and Theatre Arts"],"thesis:degree_level":["Open Access Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts (MA)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:16:51Z"}