Governance as an Operating System | The Provincie Noord-Brabant Evaluation

Context
In January 2026, the research agency KWINK groep, commissioned by the Provincie Noord-Brabant, conducted an evaluation of the application process for the Subsidieregeling Hedendaagse Kunst Noord-Brabant – Paragraaf 1 Professionele Kunsten 2025-2028. As a director of a BIS-institution and a successful applicant in this round, I was invited to provide feedback on the procedure.

What follows is a reconstruction of that input—a dialogue between the administrative framework and the cultural reality. It serves as a diagnostic on the current "operating system" of provincial governance.

Q: The evaluation asks for the strongest positive aspect of the 2025–2028 application process. Where does the system function well?

JAL: The interface itself is streamlined. The harmonisation with national standards (OCW) regarding documentation was efficient, reducing the administrative burden for organisations like ours that operate across city, provincial, and state levels.

Crucially, there was a glimpse of the 'human measure' (de menselijke maat). We committed a minor administrative error in our initial submission. The commission demonstrated the capacity to look beyond this glitch and assess the proposal on its substantive value proposition rather than rejecting it on a technicality. That flexibility is essential; it distinguishes a partner from a processor.

Q: conversely, where does the process fail?

JAL: It suffers from a technocratic, almost 'bookkeeper' mentality. The current model relies heavily on a quantitative scoring system—points for categories. While I understand the desire to depoliticise the funding distribution, we have swung too far towards an algorithmic approach.

Governance implies vision. A province needs to curate its cultural ecosystem, not just audit it based on a spreadsheet. By stripping the process of qualitative, strategic direction, we risk creating a landscape defined not by what Brabant needs, but by which organisations have the budget to hire the best copywriters. If the system rewards policy fluency over artistic necessity, we lose the very infrastructure we aim to build.

Q: You have previously described the relationship with the Province as 'transactional'.

JAL: Precisely. The current cycle is: Application → Decision → Money → Report. It is a transaction.

I advocate for a shift to Strategic Partnership. Compare this to the Raad voor Cultuur or OCW, where monitoring is a continuous dialogue. In those systems, the yearly check-in is not merely a control mechanism; it is a sparring session between partners with distinct roles but a shared objective. An application should be the logical conclusion of four years of dialogue, not a high-stakes gamble made in isolation every cycle.

Q: How does this impact the 'User Experience' of the applicants?

JAL: There is a dissonance between the medium and the message. For the administration, sending a decision letter is a functional task—closing a ticket. For the cultural organisation, it is an existential verdict. A rejection is a crisis; an acceptance is four years of safety.

The communication style is sterile. It lacks emotional intelligence. A system that determines the livelihoods of hundreds of professionals should be designed with empathy at its core. When the 'human measure' is missing from the communication, the governance feels cold and disconnected from the reality of the field.

Q: You also noted barriers regarding inclusivity. Specifically, language.

JAL: The cultural sector is fuelled by visual thinkers and neurodiverse talent. Yet, the gateway to resources is a wall of dense policy jargon. The regulation text was, at times, multi-interpretable and overly bureaucratic.

By designing an application process that is purely text-heavy and legally dense, we implicitly filter out those who do not think in linear, bureaucratic terms. If we truly value inclusivity, the form of the application must evolve. Why can we not accept video pitches or digital portfolios as formal components? We must ensure that the ability to write a grant never supersedes the ability to create culture.

Q: Final recommendation for the Provincie Noord-Brabant?

JAL: Fix the interoperability. As a 'National Player', my organisation is part of a stack that includes the City, the Province, and the State. When these layers use different definitions of 'Quality' or 'Inclusion', it creates systemic friction.

The Province should act as the middleware that harmonises these standards. Furthermore, it should move from a 'Waterfall' model (one big deadline every four years) to a 'Continuous Integration' model—where constant dialogue informs the funding decisions. That is how you build a resilient, sovereign cultural stack.