An internal review into the Long’s Center’s $25 million contract to manage Austin arts grants found gaps in billing, transparency and oversight, exposing gaps in how the city tracks performance and spending.
The findings, prompted after Austin Current first raised questions about the agreement, show the city failed to set clear guardrails, continuing a pattern auditors have warned about for two decades.
The Long Center agreement adds to a long-running pattern of weak contract oversight at City Hall. For more than two decades, the Austin City Auditor’s Office has repeatedly flagged problems in how the city monitors billions of dollars in taxpayer money paid to consultants, nonprofits and private companies.
Across audits spanning multiple time periods, city managers and council members, one issue keeps surfacing: inadequate oversight.
“There is no question that reviews and audits have shown that the administration of the city needs to have a better focus on making sure contracts are being complied with,” said Austin Mayor Kirk Watson. “My office has been in direct contact with the procurement office calling for an upgraded, updated and better process to assure compliance.”
Long Center contract under scrutiny
Since 2023, the city has contracted with the Long Center to score and administer millions in grants to community artists. Some grants, funded by the city’s hotel occupancy tax, reach up to $80,000. Musicians, venues, dancers, photographers and other artists rely on those awards to produce their art in an increasingly expensive city, where some have already been pushed out.
In February, Austin Current raised questions about how the Long Center contract was structured, including an hourly rate system that experts say is uncommon for these types of government agreements.
Shortly after, the city’s Austin Arts, Culture, Music and Entertainment, launched an internal review.
The findings, provided to Austin Current by the arts department, showed the Long Center has been able to quickly distribute grants on a large scale.
But it also identified inconsistent or unverifiable reporting and documentation, limited visibility into administrative costs, and unclear divisions of responsibility between the city and the Long Center.
The contract also lacked formal performance metrics, and invoices often did not include enough information.
“Historically, invoices referenced cost categories outlined in contract amendments but did not include detailed expense breakdowns within each submission,” said Angela Means, director of the arts department. “Moving forward, we are requiring more comprehensive, itemized invoices to provide greater clarity and accountability.”
In response to the review, the city plans to increase oversight, including quarterly performance meetings with the Long Center, standardize reporting, and impose stricter financial transparency requirements, among other things.
The arts department is also considering an external audit and preparing to rebid the contract when the Long Center contract expires in 2028.
The department is also weighing whether to bring the work in-house, a move that would require roughly 10 additional staffers and a bigger budget.
Long Center CEO Cory Baker said in a written statement to Austin Current that the nonprofit appreciates the opportunity to improve the process.
“We’re committed to working together to ensure utmost transparency, efficiency and accountability,” she said.
A pattern auditors keep flagging
The monitoring issues outlined in the Long Center review mirror weaknesses city auditors have raised for years.
They were flagged in a 2002 audit on a city housing initiative. A 2011 audit on social services contracts. A 2012 audit on $1.4 million on HIV program contracts. A 2018 audit on general contract management between Fiscal Year 2010 and Fiscal Year 2018.
Despite changes in city leaders — city managers, council members and department heads — one core warning remained the same: Austin does not have rigorous processes to ensure contractors deliver the right services for the right prices.
As a recent audit of $279 million in consulting contracts found, “Departments do not consistently evaluate the performance of their consultants. As a result, the City may be rehiring consultants with a history of performance issues.”
Specifically, across numerous reports, auditors have repeatedly found the city does not always:
- Implement recommendations from prior audits.
- Monitor contractor performance.
- Evaluate work at the end of contracts.
- Structure agreements that fully protect the city’s interests and public resources.
Those repeated gaps have led auditors to call for systemic changes to how the city manages contracts and safeguards taxpayer funds.
“Given the large number of contracts managed by the City and the significant amount of taxpayer money involved, the City needs to make comprehensive changes to ensure that all contracting activities are managed in a way that protects the City’s interests and ensures contractors comply with all applicable contract requirements,” the 2018 audit stated
Watson, who sits on the city’s audit and finance committee, said efforts are underway to strengthen oversight.
Meanwhile, the city’s arts department is focusing on improving their management of the Long Center contract and ensuring hotel occupancy tax funds are spent responsibly, Means said.
Our priority,” she said, “is to make the best decision for the program and the community.”
