Arts Development Panel Feedback - July 2009

Assessment Report - July 2009

The Arts Development Panel met on 27th and 28th August 2009 to consider the second round of grant applications for 2009 (closing date 3rd July). Applications were considered across all art forms for projects commencing after 1 December 2009.
This round included applications to the Development, Distribution, Publishing Assistance Program, A Few New Words and Short-term Artist in Residence (STAR) in all art forms.
 
Total Applications Received: 93
Total Applications Approved: 29
Success Rate: 30.8%
Total Requested: $2,136,678
Total Approved: $642,964
Allocation Rate: 30%

Panel Comments

Artistic Merit

Applicants are encouraged to tackle the conceptual core of the proposal in their application, rather than address only the tools and techniques to be deployed. Applications need to forefront an interesting artistic direction or novel approach, as well as offer a competent methodology that will realise the artistic intent. Some projects featured a competent team and good evidence of viability, but the central idea was lackluster or not sufficiently compelling as a starting point for a new creative work likely to reach a high artistic outcome.  

The Panel emphasised the importance of artistic merit as a key selection criterion for this Panel. While other funding exists across the Department and through other agencies supporting a wide range of arts practice, the Arts Development Panel regard it as critical to the professional WA arts sector that this particular pool of funding remain focused on supporting artistic excellence.

Artistic merit remains at the heart of assessment for the Arts Development Panel.  Artists, arts workers and community members involved in projects that have community cultural development [CCD] outcomes should note that Artistic merit is also measured through the integrity of the process, the involvement of community and the ability of the key personnel involved to produce high quality artworks at the end of the process. The panel noted that for a majority of applications with CCD outcomes, a discussion of the process was lacking.  Consultation with the Community and Regional Arts Development Project Officer prior to submitting an application can be of great assistance to applicants in addressing the artistic merit criterion as it relates to their practice and project.

Collaborations

The Panel was supportive of the many applications involving collaborations as the networks that would develop would be advantageous to participants. However, some of these were not selected for funding as the artistic merit across the collaborators was inconsistent. Applicants should bear in mind that the application process is highly competitive and that all facets of an application and all members of an artistic team are assessed according to the selection criteria, not just the named applicant. 
 
Support Material

The Panel commented on the need to provide succinct, recent, quality support material that clearly supported the current application, rather than simply provide general evidence of past work. The support material is used to assess the practical and artistic viability of the project.

Artists are encouraged to ensure this material is at the highest level, as some proposals suffered in assessment when the support material did not substantiate an otherwise compelling idea or venture.

The Panel’s request for quality support material that clearly supports the current application will be clarified in the 2010 version of the Application form.
 
Budgets

This Panel continued with the standard set by earlier Arts Development Panels where budgets for successful applications were funded to the full amount of the request. The Panel stresses the need for applicants to review the accuracy of their budgets, as the Panel was unable to support a number of artistically strong proposals due to poor financial planning. If budgets were not substantiated with appropriate quotes or adequate budget notes, this was a reason for rejection due to poor financial planning. The panel will not trim a budget to accommodate unsubstantiated quotes or inadequate budget notes. 

Annual Funding

When assessing annual funding applications the Panel retains the right to select the artistic elements that best demonstrate the selection criteria from within the program of activities proposed.  Applicants to this category need to be aware that demonstrating good financial planning in the context of annual funding, includes providing a breakdown of how the requested amount of funding would be applied across the various projects within the program of activities. 

Applicants with existing annual funding status should bear in mind annual funding is subject to the same competitive process as all applications. Annual funding status offers no guarantee of success.

General Comments

Project Officer Consultation

The Panel observed that the general quality of applications was much higher where a project officer had been consulted. This is because the Project Officer is able to offer an insight into how applications are assessed by the Panel as well as suggest the parameters of discussions that usually take place. This feedback is indicative only as each Panel operates with autonomy.  The Panel strongly encouraged all applicants to speak to a Project Officer when preparing their application to assist them in addressing the selection criteria.

Support Material

Applicants are again reminded to observe limits to support material as outlined in the Arts Grant Handbook. Applicants should be aware that excess support material is returned to applicants unviewed by the Panel. 

Budgets

Some professional rates presented in budgets were at a level that is disproportionately high in comparison to other applications. While many artists contributed much of this wage back as in-kind, this made budgets more complicated than they need to be and encouraged artists to inadequately pay themselves for their own contribution.  As many of the published rates recommended for specialist expertise are at an hourly consultant’s rate only, it is more practical to look to relevant professions to provide a rate for a longer period of activity with appropriate allowance for entry level, mid career and senior levels of pay.

Applicants should bear in mind the page limits of the application form and the overall funds available in any round. If a proposal is too large in scale to adequately be addressed in the application format, applicants should consider whether a more focused application that clearly addresses the selection criteria might offer a greater chance of securing support through the panel process.

There is also the possibility that a work might be better broken into a series of stages that could be supported across more than one round. Where the work is highly speculative or risk taking in nature, this approach allows a Panel to see outcomes that might strengthen the case for future funding.

If the total amount requested is very large, a realistic plan to secure additional sources of income may be needed to demonstrate that the undertaking is viable, even if these sources are not confirmed at the time of assessment.  It should be noted that all applications must include other sources of cash or in kind income to be eligible.

Evaluation

Evaluation is an important part of any application. An artist needs to put in place good processes for artistic assessment and/or feedback from participants, audience members, or independent peers.  The chosen process should lead to critical review of the project to move the applicant’s practice forward, as well as contribute to the broader development of that particular art form in Western Australia.  Activities that assist this to take place are eligible for support within the applicant’s budget.

Art form	Received	Approved	Success	Requested	Approved	Success
Music	10	5	50%	$187,656	$96,590	51%
Dance	7	3	43%	$182,010	$54,053	30%
Writing	13	5	38%	$293,222	$100,259	34%
Visual Arts and Craft	35	10	28%	$710,909	$222,357	31%
Theatre	18	2	11%	$479,359	$58,464	12%
Multi-Arts	8	4	50%	$265,672	$111,241	42%
Short Term Artist in Residence	2	nil	-	$17,850	-	-
TOTAL	93	29	31%	$2,136,678	$642,964	40%

The above figures include applications to the Annual Funding program. In that category, there were 8 applications received and 6 were successful. The total amount requested: $333,542,  total amount approved:  $273,827.  Successful applicants to this category represented Multi-arts (1); Theatre (1); Visual Arts & Craft (2); and Writing (2).

The above figures also include a total of 16 applications from regionally-based applicants with requests totaling $311,724. Five applicants were successful for a total of $107,725. Successful regional applicants represented Music (1); Visual arts & Craft (2); Theatre (1); and Multi-arts (1).