Those that have finally been paid their emergency grants are left with little time to use them: "They've put companies in danger more than they've helped."
Alex Brenner
Events support companies remain unsure of their obligations around using grants they've received months late.
Payments are "trickling through" but many companies in the live arts supply chain are still waiting for Culture Recovery Fund grants expected in April.
ArtsProfessional understands questions from Treasury about companies' receipt of Government-backed loans are behind the delays, but DCMS refuses to say whether they could also lead to reduced awards.
READ MORE:
- Supply chain companies fear reductions over loan status
- Arts Council England defends Culture Recovery Fund distribution
Companies say DCMS has so far rejected requests to extend the deadline for using funding beyond June 30.
Instead, they are being asked to report back on how they have spent grants that, in most cases, they've only just received.
They are now appealing to Arts Council England (ACE) to consult them on delivery of the third Culture Recovery Fund (CRF) round.
Bryan Raven, a spokesperson for campaign group We Make Events, said "they should be hauled over the coals, but in a positive way".
"How can they have not vetted the process by the 7th June when they published the recipients on the 30th March?"
Confusion and conflict
Companies that have been paid are reluctant to spend their grants, worried the late payment means they can't deliver what they promised.
Grants have not always been paid in full, with up to a third held back as a later instalment. Companies fear the remainder may not be paid if they don't fulfil their obligations.
But those whose awards were less than they applied for say they don't know which parts of their application they are meant to pursue.
And they're fed up with opaque and confusing communication from ACE, "who don't appear to have any idea what they're doing".
"They have given me the money in the middle of June and are still expecting us to deliver on our commitments when they haven't delivered on theirs," one company director said.
DCMS says 85% of payments have been made; however, this figure reflects all CRF round two awardees and is out of date.
While more supply chain companies have been paid in the past week, Raven said six out of eight he spoke to on Wednesday were still waiting.
His own company, White Light, was paid last week - the day after they were asked how they spent the grant.
"That just proves there's a level of incompetence... we're going, 'come on guys, at least cross reference.'"
The "unsuitability of the process for commercial suppliers" needs to be addressed before CRF round three, Raven added.
'Never again'
Fixing the mistakes of the second CRF round may not be enough to encourage suppliers to apply to the third, even if they need it.
Some companies said they would never apply for public funding again.
"There was a point where I thought, I wish I had never done this because now I don't know where I stand," Rinse FM Founder Geeneus Rinse said.
"In some ways they've put companies in danger more than they've helped."
He was paid this week after confusion around how his Government-assured Bounce Back loan, which was spent before applying to the CRF, might affect his award.
He says four accountants looked over the questions from ACE - none understood what was being asked.
"I'm grateful for the money but the communication, the stress, their own understanding of what they're doing... they seem overwhelmed.
"We're a commercial company and we've had some decent success. A smaller company with less going on - this kind of thing could have put them into liquidation."