Adventures in the Screen Trade: A Foundation Enters the World of Documentary Film

By Jessica Schwartz, The Wallace Foundation

Since 2000, the Wallace Foundation has invested $215 million in their education leadership initiative. The film they commissioned in 2007, now in production, will follow school principals and their teams at several Illinois schools, focusing on their efforts to create a climate where all students can achieve at high levels. This article describes why they decided to commission, and the somewhat unusual process they devised to carry it out that allowed them to stay true to their mission and approach.

The Wallace Foundation has undertaken support for some limited TV news coverage of issues or projects we have funded, but, until 2007, we had never considered a documentary film as an important means to support positive change. A film project on school leadership took us into new, uncharted territory.

Since we launched our initiative in 2000, we have made steady progress with a number of partners to build awareness that effective education leadership is crucial to turning around low-performing schools and to closing the achievement gap. We fund innovative work on the ground (we currently invest in 22 states and countless districts), commission research where there are gaps in our knowledge about what constitutes effective policies and practices, and support a wide variety of communication efforts to build awareness of the importance of leadership and share lessons with education policymakers and practitioners. We do this by building wallacefoundation.org as a knowledge hub, where we offer publications for free downloading; by convening experts, holding policy briefings and speaking at conferences; and through traditional dissemination and advertising of our publications.

From publication downloads, conference attendance and survey responses, we knew that we were already reaching a significant number of policymakers and practitioners, and that they valued the knowledge they receive from us. So why a film? There were two reasons. First, we agreed that we had amassed a sufficient body of knowledge to warrant further broadening our reach. And, second, we realized that we needed to reach out to groups who had a say in education policy, but who were less aware of what we had learned about effective school leadership – that without it, school improvement efforts were likely to fail. To reach these audiences, a documentary film could be very useful. We had both a target audience (policymakers and practitioners less aware of the role of leadership) and a purpose (share, in a compelling way, what we have learned about the connection of leadership to school improvement). We were ready to begin. But there were several challenges ahead.

Getting Started
To maintain our reputation as a credible source of knowledge, we carefully consider what we learn from research and site investments before we share lessons with field leaders. This presented our first challenge in funding a documentary. In contrast to our internal reviews of publications, there would be little room for the kind of “content deliberation” to which we were accustomed. We recognized that editorial independence was a non-negotiable if we wanted the film to be considered for broadcast; and if the film didn’t have a chance to be broadcast, that was a big opportunity cost. Yet, we also knew that we could not afford to simply write a check and hope for the best.

Venturing into the unknown involved risks, and it demanded that we ask ourselves relevant questions to help minimize those risks: what were our core convictions, hopes, fears? What story would we want to tell if we were producing the film? What story would we NOT want to tell? We knew the topic of the vital and changing role of school leadership would present a challenge to any filmmaker. School principals are all too often depicted either as heroes or bumblers. Neither would do. The film would need to bring the real, everyday issues and problems facing dedicated school leaders to life, while simultaneously meeting our need for the film to be based on credible evidence.

What emerged was our realization that we would need to develop a process that would be transparent internally and therefore offer our colleagues and board the opportunity to offer counsel. The process would have to yield a highly talented, experienced and committed filmmaker who would be willing to see the foundation and our network of experts as advisors to the project — and who would be willing to be immersed in the research and field insights emerging from our leadership initiative.

Selecting the Filmmaker
We consulted such organizations as GFEM and POV to identify potential filmmakers and assembled biographies for a list of filmmakers. In October 2006, our board approved an initial $50,000 to conduct the selection process, and we formed an advisory committee of educators and experts in documentary filmmaking, along with Wallace staff.

After much deliberation and consultation, we designed a two-phased request for proposal (RFP) process to take place over a six-month period: phase one, a short proposal in response to the RFP, by invitation only; and phase two, modest grants of $10,000 each for three finalists to develop the proposal into a treatment, with related promotional and outreach plans.

This process raised objections from some of the filmmakers we first contacted. In one conversation, a prominent filmmaker honestly told us that unless we were ready to commit to the project after only one competitive round he would not apply. We were not ready, because we needed to have more assurance that our standards for credibility would be met. Of the 16 filmmakers invited, nine submitted proposals. We believe this was because of the length of the process, the short timeline to develop the first proposal and the lack of guarantee that anyone would get a green light: the final decision would only be made by our board on the merits of the finalist’s treatment.

After rigorous review and advice from our advisors, we selected three production companies to develop film treatments on the basis of the following criteria:

• Filmmaker’s vision for the documentary

• Proposed project is clearly responsive to the needs of key audiences who are in positions to lead change – i.e., state policymakers, district and school leaders, colleges of education, aspiring leaders.

• Filmmaker’s ability to produce high-quality, dynamic films that can deepen the understanding of complex issues and motivate opinion leaders to seek out solutions.

• The proposal illustrates use of effective outreach and dissemination strategies from the filmmaker’s previous work and presents a concrete plan for this project.

• The proposal indicates that this film would have national resonance, but play in local and regional markets that offer a springboard for dialogue.

The good news is that the process yielded strong proposals, making the decision difficult. It was a close competition: if this were a race, first place would be won by tenths of seconds, not seconds. But our top choice was also clear. We selected Nomadic Pictures, a Chicago-based film and television production company founded in 1991 by filmmaker Tod Lending. Not only did we like the filmmakers’ treatment and respect their earlier film work, but they prepared a 10-minute demo that illustrated their approach to the project.

Lending and partner filmmaker David Mrazek proposed an in-depth look at three school principals, while integrating expert commentary in the form of an on-screen narrator/educator to guide and interpret what we would be watching. We awarded Nomadic Pictures with a $1.5 million grant in October 2007, approved by our Board a full year after approving funding of the selection process. As of April 2008, Tod and David have been shooting since last November in schools in Chicago and Springfield, Illinois. Release is scheduled for fall 2009. An outreach partner, the Los Angeles based firm Outreach Extensions, has begun planning as well.

Planning for Broader Outreach
We learned from our advisers that documentaries are most effective in meeting a foundation’s social impact goals when they are accompanied by strong outreach plans that engage viewers. The project includes a DVD package intended for practitioners and a shorter version aimed at policymakers.
The film will be developed for broadcast; the DVD will be prepared for dissemination, with, we hope, lasting benefits as a convening tool around which key audiences can discuss the roles and job descriptions of principals and determine policy changes that might result in schools getting the leaders they deserve. Through targeted outreach, we hope the film can become, as Roger Bailey of Video Active Productions was quoted as saying, “…the ‘public space’ where we can share knowledge, ideas and identities within our own communities.”

Lessons from Our Experience
If we had to do the selection process over again, we would make some adjustments, but keep the two phases. The half-year process allowed us time to learn more about the business of commissioning documentary film, get to know the filmmakers and watch and discuss their films, and have the filmmakers get to know us and what kind of “partners” we promised to be. What we would adjust: create less of a burden on the filmmakers in the first phase to develop full film concepts in a short time frame by offering additional time; and offer more funds for the second phase to take their explorations further and recommend that they produce a demo, like the one created by Nomadic Pictures.

For those funders who are contemplating joining us in the “screen trade” (and we hope there are many of you), here are some Do’s and Don’ts for you to consider:

Do’s

1. Create clear objectives for the project and understand how it fits within your larger strategic and communication goals;
2. Identify the audiences you want to reach and whether you need national and/or local broadcast, or whether your purpose would be met by other means, perhaps by producing shorter video pieces for targeted dissemination;
3. Gauge your foundation’s interest in a film project and be frank about the potential risks and disappointments, along with costs, for such a venture. Map out a transparent selection process that addresses internal concerns and assures all parties that the selection was fair and merit-based; and
4. Talk to as many people as you can about a good selection process, the right elements in an RFP and realistic costs, timelines, etc. This includes the experts at GFEM.

Don’ts

1. Don’t go it alone and get too far along before checking internally who is and isn’t with you;
2. Don’t make your selection of filmmakers based on past work only — you need to get a clear sense of their vision for the project you want; and
3. Don’t mistake an analytic, systemic process to choose the right film project and filmmaker with an understanding that a film may need to tell a story differently than other media; while demands for credibility are the same, films will not succeed unless they are compelling and able to reach both the head and the heart.

In Conclusion
By talking to many individuals with knowledge about documentary film, we learned various ways to harness the power of a national television broadcast and numerous media resources to focus attention and trigger action at the national, state and local levels. We came up with a project that helps us our strategic goals and objectives.

We also learned that there are several ways to identify and select the right documentary filmmaker. Because of the process we chose, we now have the confidence that we selected the best filmmakers for our project, capable of treating the subject of school leadership with balance and intelligence without forfeiting point of view or newsworthiness. We realized that there are trade-offs; a “filmmaker for hire” could deliver an excellent film – telling the story we would like to tell – but will less likely meet the criteria for broadcast. At the same time, we were not following other foundation models of funding worthwhile projects, distinct and separate from foundation initiative goals. Our project was more of a hybrid: we were commissioning a film that would meet our initiative goals while maintaining the filmmaker’s independent voice. Shooting has now commenced. We will know whether our venture into the world of filmmaking was worth the journey in another year. Stay tuned!
_____________

Jessica Schwartz is the Senior Communications Officer at The Wallace Foundation. She will occasionally check in with updates on her foundation’s Adventures in the Screen Trade. Among the top 40 private U.S. foundations with assets of more than $1.7 billion, The Wallace Foundation strives to be a “knowledge center” for policymakers and practitioners in its three areas of focus: building appreciation and demand for the arts; improving after-school learning opportunities; and strengthening education leadership to improve student achievement. The approach common to all areas of their work is to support innovation, gather credible lessons about what works and what does not, and then share those lessons broadly with the field.

The Filmmakers: Nomadic Pictures. Tod Lending and David Mrazek are both award-winning film producers, directors and writers. Lending’s feature documentary, Legacy, tells the story of how a family, over a five-year period, recovered from the tragic death of a young boy, broke free of welfare, overcame addiction and escaped their violent community. It was a critical success at the Sundance Film Festival, was nominated for an Academy Award in 2000 and aired on both Cinemax/HBO and PBS. Lending next directed Omar & Pete, which followed two African-American men’s struggles after their releases from prison. He also wrote, produced and directed the award-winning No Time to Be a Child, a three-part documentary series, co-produced with Detroit Public Television. He is the recipient of numerous awards, including a national Emmy for Outstanding Children’s Special, A Casey Medal for Meritorious Journalism, the CINE Gold Eagle, Golden Apple, the New York Festival World Medal and the Innovation in Documentary Award. Mrazek was series producer and co-writer of The Kingdom of David: The Saga of the Israelites, a four-hour nationally broadcast PBS series filmed on location in Israel, Tunisia, Morocco and Greece. He has produced and co-written two programs for the PBS American Experience series: The Duel on dueling as an eighteenth-century political tool (and the story of Hamilton and Burr); and Woodrow Wilson, on the transformation of a history professor into a great president.

To read more about the results of The Wallace Foundation's efforts, read the second article in this GFEM series Adventures in the Screen Trade: Filmmaking 101 for an Engaged Funder and The Payoff from Betting On A Documentary Film from the Communications Network blog.