BIPOC Artists & Organizations
Supporting Black, Latinx, Indigenous, and artists of color through reduced barriers and targeted resources
326
mentions
Voices from Austin's Creative Community
An analysis of community feedback on cultural funding programs
The data presented here is based on community feedback received through multiple channels including an online survey, focus groups, and one-to-one interviews. This analysis is based on responses through June 13, 2025. Due to the ongoing structure of the engagement process, not all responses are reflected. To view additional comments and submissions, additional data can be found on the City of Austin's Open Data portal soon.
- 1,244 Survey Responses
- 200+ Focus Group Participants
- 50+ Community Conversations
*Responses collected through June 13, 2025
Executive Summary
Our analysis of 6,904 responses reveals a vibrant yet challenged ecosystem. Three key findings emerged from the comprehensive analysis of Austin's investment in arts, culture, music, and heritage.
Key Findings
Economic Barriers
18% of mentions
Affordability is a critical threat to the vibrancy and diversity of Austin's creative sector.
Process and Transparency
20% of mentions
Complex programs and a lack of transparency erode trust, integrity, and participation.
Equity Gap
13% of mentions
Bridging intent with implementation requires cooperation with infrastructure development.
Who We Heard From
Our findings reflect many voices of Austin's creative community.
Share of Voice
593 respondents identified with multiple roles
64.5%
Creatives
Direct beneficiaries and workforce of the cultural sector
60.2%
Community Members
Audiences and civic supporters of cultural arts
27.1%
Organizational Staff
Offering insights into operations and sustainability
Geographic Distribution
Survey Response Distribution by Zip Code
Larger circles indicate more responses. Note the concentration in central and east Austin.
92
Zip Codes Participated
78745
Highest Response
78734
Lowest Awareness
What We Heard
Our analysis revealed key themes and insights from the community's feedback across all programs and channels.
Top 10 Themes
The following represents the most critical issues raised by the community.
Explore Each Theme
Program-Specific Insights
Each cultural funding program faces unique challenges and opportunities.
Key Focus Areas
Critical areas requiring focused attention and action based on community feedback
Equity & Access Analysis
Understanding barriers to equitable participation in Austin
Key Areas of Focus
Disability Access
Ensuring venues, programs, and communications are fully accessible to disabled community members
248
mentions
LGBTQIA+ Inclusion
Creating safe, welcoming spaces and opportunities for LGBTQIA+ artists and audiences
189
mentions
Language Access
Providing multilingual support and removing language barriers to participation
215
mentions
Geographic Equity
Ensuring cultural opportunities reach all Austin neighborhoods, not just central areas
294
mentions
Economic Barriers
Addressing financial obstacles that prevent equitable participation in cultural programs
412
mentions
Transportation & Accessibility
If community members cannot physically get to a venue, the cultural experience is inaccessible. More than 28% of all responses included transportation barriers.
Key Transportation Issues
Parking Costs
Average $15-25 per event
Limited Transit
No late-night service
Accessibility
Venue compliance issues
Methodology
A comprehensive approach to understanding Austin's creative community
1,244
Survey Responses
17
Focus Groups
6,904
Comments Analyzed
Data Collection
Community feedback was collected through multiple channels:
•
Online Survey
1,244 responses from Austin's creative community
•
Focus Groups
17 sessions with targeted stakeholder groups
•
1:1 Interviews
Dozens of in-depth conversations with community leaders
Analysis Process
All 6,904 qualitative comments were analyzed using a multi-layered approach:
•
AI-Assisted Analysis
Advanced pattern recognition and theme identification
•
Manual Validation
Human review and refinement by research team
•
Quantitative Analysis
Statistical review of participation and demographics
•
Cross-Reference
Validation across multiple data sources
Limitations
While comprehensive, this analysis acknowledges certain constraints:
•
Self-Selection Bias
Participants chose to engage, potentially missing some voices
•
Digital Divide
Online format may have excluded some populations
•
Time Constraints
Limited inclusion and depth of analysis in some areas
•
Data Completeness
Listening sessions data could not be fully integrated into this analysis at time of reporting
Acknowledgement
Although every effort was made to engage with diverse communities, we acknowledge that not everyone has the ability to participate in this engagement phase.