Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Grant Process Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel sets funding recommendation floor and urges clearer rubric, longer review timeline
Summary
During its virtual review, the Wisconsin Arts Board panelers agreed to set a funding-recommendation cutoff at the application Artworks from Milwaukee (score 84.5) and offered feedback calling for a clearer rubric, more time to review, and named artist/partner lists in stronger applications.
After reviewing applications, the panel examined averaged scores on a shared screen and discussed a sensible cutoff point for recommending funding. Moderator Dale (Moderator) shared the results and asked the panel whether a natural break existed between recommended and not-recommended applications.
Panelists identified a natural breakpoint between Artworks from Milwaukee and the next application, and the panel set the floor at a score of 84.5. The transcript records panelists seeking unanimous consent and then saying, “All good. Okay, great,” indicating consensus on the cutoff.
Panelists also gave process feedback. Panelist Alan (Panelist) requested a rubric, saying, “I would just second my request from the beginning for a rubric,” to reduce scoring variability and to clarify how point deductions should be applied. Several panelists asked for more time during future reviews; one noted the current schedule felt compressed compared with prior cycles. Panelists and the monitor praised the split-screen review format and the availability of work samples and artist bios as helpful materials for evaluation.
Action recorded: by consensus the panel set a scoring floor at 84.5 (applications scoring 84.5 and above to be recommended for funding), and asked staff to use panel feedback to inform applicant technical assistance and future review timelines.
Process recommendations: provide a written rubric with scoring ranges and criteria, allow a longer review window for panelists, encourage applicants to include named artists and community partners and stronger documentation for accessibility and evaluation plans.
