Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arts Board staff advise grantees on evaluation: match tools to goals, use incentives and alternatives to boost responses
Summary
At a recipient briefing, Arts Board staff urged grantees to match evaluation methods to project goals, offered examples (surveys with measurable targets, semi-structured interviews), and recipients shared practical tactics to increase response rates.
Arts Board staff and grant recipients used a 45-minute online briefing to discuss how grantees should evaluate Creative Communities projects and what to include in final reports for the National Endowment for the Arts.
“Figure out what it will take for you to know that your project was a success according to the goals that you set out for this project,” said Caitlyn Bro, Folk and Traditional Arts Coordinator. Staff urged grantees to design surveys and instruments that measure the specific outcomes they proposed—knowledge change, social connection, or audience development—rather than only marketing metrics.
Staff offered examples from prior applicants, such as setting measurable goals in survey work (for example, increasing from 75% to 80% of participating artists rating the project as beneficial). They also advised keeping surveys short, tracking counts the project will serve, and uploading representative images and short video clips to the final report.
Recipients described common challenges and practical solutions. Rachel (participant) said her group sometimes gets only five responses from a cast of 40. Other participants suggested paper surveys at events, collecting responses during intermission, offering small incentives (ticket drawings, treats), using volunteers at exits to prompt completion, and running short oral surveys for audiences with limited English literacy.
Paku (participant) said oral surveys and follow-up interviews produced more meaningful results for communities with lower written-English literacy; another recipient recommended semi-structured interviews to surface qualitative themes such as whether participants felt safe to experiment in an artistic setting.
Staff reiterated that final reports require a high-level summary of evaluation findings—not verbatim transcripts—and invited grantees to send draft surveys or evaluation plans for staff review and one-on-one follow-up.
