IT’S that time of year again, when arts directors find themselves buried in exactly the sort of paperwork that they went into their jobs to avoid.

But form filling is no longer the preserve of grey-faced office workers. Funding has to come from somewhere and instead of singing for their supper, which creative types have been comfortable doing for centuries, they have to answer questions for it instead.

So it’s out with the 10am starts and in with the crack of dawn get-ups as they try to fit in the red tape around creating the projects they need the money for.

With so little cash to go around, this process is a necessary evil and pity the poor person who has to decide between two projects knowing that without their backing the rejected party may have nowhere to turn.

Perfectly good ideas are kicked to the kerb simply because they haven’t ticked all the right boxes, and when there’s not enough money for every great project almost any decision can be seen as the wrong one.

As for those that do succeed – are they able to stay true to their creative vision or do they have to compromise between the ideal project and one that fits the application form?

Some organisations are managing to find a balance.

Two years ago a funding shortfall of £19,000 forced the cancellation of the Liverpool Shakespeare Festival.

Yet a year later, its organisers had more money than ever before from relatively conventional sources – doubling its record to £65,000.