Scores and Comments

21.c.ps.170.303

U.S. Space Walk of Fame Museum, Inc.

Application Details
Proposal Type	General Program Support - Discipline-Based
Request Amount	$36,698
Total Score	618.000
Average Score	88.286

Panelist Scores

Panelist	Excellence	Impact	Management	Accessibility	Total
Baker Holly	38	29	19	10	96
Falwell Kerry	37	25	15	8	85
Hipschman Dorrie	38	26	15	8	87
Horowitz Sharon	40	25	15	10	90
McLane Preston	36	28	15	9	88
Overton Robert	34	29	19	9	91
Tomor Michael	35	23	13	10	81

Comments
Baker Holly - Score: 96.000
I appreciate that your goals and objectives are very detailed. I also appreciate your goal of focusing on minority astronauts, space workers, and women. I believe that the U.S. Space Walk of Fame Museum provides vital cultural resources to its community. Well done.
Falwell Kerry - Score: 85.000
No direct economic impact data for the Museum. Lacking detailed evaluation information to understand.
Hipschman Dorrie - Score: 87.000
The operational budgets do not include any non-administrative staff, but the grant proposal includes programmatic staff expenses. Please explain
Horowitz Sharon - Score: 90.000
{No comments provided.}
McLane Preston - Score: 88.000
Good, project-specific information intermixed with general information the relevance of which is at times difficult to discern. In future applications, try to emphasize project and program-specific information keyed directly to activities and events supported by grant funds.
Overton Robert - Score: 91.000
{No comments provided.}
Tomor Michael - Score: 81.000
Excellence: Admirable STEAM mission, Goals and Objectives. Partnerships and Collaborations are listed but the responsibilities and benefits of the relationship are missing. Not sure how these significant partnerships are managed. Timeline suggests curriculum development, but what is it tied to? Collections? School standards and testing? It's unclear and doesn't tie back to the objectives directly? I can't help but wonder without further explanation, how the organization carries out the projects. Giving them the benefit of the doubt . . . Collections summary is very thorough. Impact is relatively modest, both in number of people served and reached given the amount of curriculum development and student focus. Of the 2,842 projected to be engaged, close to 2,000 are students. Proposal impact shares the national statistics on the challenge, but it would have been great to have a more flushed out description of their proposed impact in relation to the national / regional impact. Strength of the program seems to be kids, so unclear about the targeted advertising - spending 5,000 a year on rack cards? Management: Is there an Director or it is only an education director with an education coordinator as the Education Curriculum writer, since the timeline suggests this is the bulk of their focus for 20-21. Can't surmise the breakout cost of the Director (if this is full-time?) or if Almost half of the Director's Salary is grant supported and represents 85% of the grant request. Is this realistic if the funds don't come in? How would they meet their goal without the curriculum being written. I'm not sure they can carry out this project without further information. ADA: No red flags.