Wisconsin Arts Board panel reviews Creation & Presentation grants, flags one applicant as ineligible

MADISON, Wis. — A Wisconsin Arts Board advisory panel convened virtually to review Creation & Presentation grant applications and deliver scoring recommendations to agency staff, with members praising several long-running presenters, questioning incomplete materials from some applicants and noting that any applicant scoring below 50 points will be taken out of consideration.

The panel — led by the panel chair Bill (panel chair) and supported by Wisconsin Arts Board staff including George Sugross, director; Karen Geschko, assistant director; Dale Johnson, grants and information specialist; and Caitlin Burrell, folk & traditional arts coordinator — reviewed roughly a dozen applications spanning dance, theater, music and presenting organizations. Panelists said they judged applications on four program criteria: artistic/educational/cultural value, organizational and financial management, community participation and accessibility, and planning/evaluation/documentation.

Panelists praised several organizations for audience reach and innovation. Early Music Now in Milwaukee drew favorable comments for using organizational reserves to expand outreach and experimenting with programs such as “baroque and beer” and pay-what-you-can performances. Dane Dances (Madison) was highlighted for broad summer reach and strong community engagement; the Mabel Tainter (Menomonie) and Grand Oshkosh (Oshkosh) were noted for strong regional draw, historic-preservation work and robust education programming. Token Creek Chamber Music Festival and Park Center (Hayward) were commended for local programming rooted in long histories.

At the same time, panelists called out shortcomings. Peter Strathis Dance Inc. submitted materials the panel considered incomplete or inconsistent — missing organization plans, mismatched revenue figures between the application summary and IRS Form 990, and attachments that were not accessible. Strollers Theatre (Madison) drew concern for fragile finances and a staffing model where some directors were asked to advance royalties; panelists said the organization appears to be “on a knife’s edge” and urged staff follow-up. Several applicants lacked completed evaluation tools or detailed plans, which panelists said weakened their narratives.

"We are so grateful to all of you for taking this on," Wisconsin Arts Board Director George Sugross told the panel, thanking reviewers for their time and expertise.

Panel procedure and next steps were reiterated during the meeting. Karen Geschko, the Arts Board assistant director, told panelists: "If the applicant has received less than 50 points, at the end of the discussion of the panel meeting, then we will assume that ... they are automatically taken out of consideration by for a grant this year" — a standing threshold the panel applied in this review. Panel recommendations will be compiled by staff and presented to the full Wisconsin Arts Board for ratification; applicants will be notified of grant decisions by mid-December, the staff said.

Panelists also made technical suggestions for improving the application and review process, including clearer distinction between artistic expertise vs. organizational expertise in the online form, making applicant names more prominent in the review interface, and providing applicants clearer guidance on evaluation documentation. Several panelists encouraged more “stretch” programming in presenters’ seasons — introducing artists or genres that expand existing audience tastes rather than only repeating proven draws — and recommended that smaller presenters use the Wisconsin Presenters Network and other local networks for technical assistance and partnerships.

The panel did not take any formal motion votes during the session; its role was to score applications and to forward recommendations and written comments to Arts Board staff. Staff said they will share the panel’s written comments with applicants when notifications are issued.

The Arts Board convenes the full board at a later meeting to review and ratify panel recommendations. The panel’s written notes and audio recording will be provided to applicants when they are notified of outcomes, the assistant director said.