Scores and Comments

19.c.pr.180.380

St Andrew's Protestant Episcopal Church

Application Details

Proposal TypeSpecific Cultural Project - Discipline-Based
Request Amount
$10,000
Total Score452.000
Average Score90.400

Panelist Scores

Panelist Excellence Impact Management Accessibility Total
Cox Elaine 38 28 19 9 94
Jose Brian 35 23 17 9 84
Palkhivala Tania 36 26 20 10 92
Rivera Darren 39 29 18 10 96
Rusconi Ellen 36 25 15 10 86

Comments

Cox Elaine - Score: 94.000

Achievable goals and objectives that should be easy to attain. Thank you for your detailed timeline. 

Would love to see an example of your educational resource guides. Appreciate that they adhere to curriculum and state standards. 

Strong marketing plan.

Jose Brian - Score: 84.000

Applicant does a good job of tying activities to mission. It does a good job of providing measurable objectives and goals, and provides solid partners.

Reviewer would like to see detailed evidence of economic impact.

Applicant shows evidence of fiscal stability. reviewer would like more detail in evaluation methods.

Palkhivala Tania - Score: 92.000

It would be useful to better understand the audience in order to be able to more fully represent which counties will be served by your programming. I imagine there must minimally be participation from people from surrounding or nearby counties.

There is no explanation as to the economic impact of this Specific Cultural Project. In the future the Arts & Economic Prosperity calculator could be useful to help articulate this.

I appreciate that because you are serving a Hispanic/Latino demographic you are also taking the measures to conduct outreach to those communities through Spanish language press and other efforts.

Rivera Darren - Score: 96.000
Strong diversity of programming and audience cultivation. Measurable outcomes are included but could be expanded to include patron satisfaction, benefits to outreach participants, etc. Greater detail about audience surveys and outreach evaluations would be helpful.
Rusconi Ellen - Score: 86.000

Goals, Objectives and Activities - very good.  Objectives are measurable and clear.

Partnerships - more detail would strengthen the application.  For example, marketing partnerships?  Partners who help wspecifically with outreach?

Timeline is very detailed and well thought out.

Proposal Impact - quantifying economic impact would strengthen this proposal.

Marketing - more quantification would give context (for example, how many handbills are made per event?  How many thousands receive the eblasts?)

Fiscal Condition - expansion is good, but is there a reserve or funding in place to be used for expansion?  More info about current financial conditions would improve application and give us more on which to assess management.

Evaluation plan is sufficient but moderate.

Supplemental materials show many events.