On July 1, 1973, we began our arts administration intern program with Douglas Johnson of Cleveland, Ohio. I would like to review with you what we did - and to recommend that we do it again as revised in the proposal included in this report.

We started out with the idea of combining a learning experience (attendance at the Institute's Summer Management Development Program) with a through-the-year internship in an arts organization. The arts organization (in this case, Karamu House in Cleveland) was selected in coordination with appropriate NEA staff and was regarded as an organization where the intern could have an experience in quality management. In addition to accepting the candidate for our management program, the Institute was to monitor the intern through visitation and to require the candidate to satisfy certain tutorial requirements, supplemented by written reports.

We accomplished our objectives and a chronicle of our activities is included in this report together with summaries and copies of Johnson's written work. Also you will find observations and suggestions about our program written by Douglas Johnson, the intern, and Kenneth Snipes, Executive Director of Karamu House, who served as Johnson's supervisor during the year.

As the faculty from Harvard University, we served as tutors and monitors. We made four visits to Cleveland from September 1973 through May 1974. Johnson wrote nine reports (July 1973-May 1974) and came to Cambridge for an extended tutorial session in March 1974.

The initial schedule set up in September 1973 was fulfilled by all parties concerned. Johnson chose significant projects and met his report deadlines. Kenneth Snipes effectively played his role as supervisor, and the Institute's staff and faculty met their responsibilities as monitors and tutors.

As you read the chronicle and the reports, please notice how the administrative grid, (reflecting the learning) set up by Johnson in September 1973, is interwoven in Johnson's descriptions of his projects.

Observations and evaluations made by Johnson and us appear throughout the chronicle and the reports. I believe they culminate in our proposal for a new intern program which I strongly endorse.

It is not possible to evaluate our efforts in a quantitative way, but I am satisfied that the program was successful. John certainly developed professionally and felt that the program was effective. Snipes was most helpful, and in addition to his supervisory role, submitted his ideas for a new program. As mentioned, their observations are included herein. My evaluation is that this was an effective program; all of us learned much about administration in the arts.

CONTENTS
Exhibit 1. Resume of Douglas Johnson, intern.

Section 1. Introduction and Chronicle of program.
Section 2. Observations and evaluation by Johnson and Snipes.
Section 3. Proposal for new intern program 1975-1976.
Section 4. Summaries of reports written by Douglas Johnson.
Section 5. Reports written by Douglas Johnson:
                     Report #1  Summary of scenario written for MDP IV - July 1973.
                     Report #2  Project proposals and administrative categories grid - 
                                     September 6, 1973.
                     Report #3  Progress report and list of projects - September 27, 1973.
                     Report #4  Box-office report on findings - December 5, 1973.
                     Report #5  House manager checklist - February 1, 1974.
                     Report #6  Diary (Jan.30-March 29, 1974) sample sheets.
                     Report #7  Bacchus and the Wheatley Players - February 1, 1974.
                     Report #8  The problems of Karamu - March 12, 1974.
                     Report #9  Humanist theatre - May 15, 1974.