Scores and Comments
19.c.pr.170.255
WorkNet Pinellas, Inc.
Application Details |
|
|---|---|
| Proposal Type | Specific Cultural Project - Discipline-Based |
| Request Amount |
$24,750
|
| Total Score | 599.000 |
| Average Score | 85.571 |
Panelist Scores
| Panelist | Excellence | Impact | Management | Accessibility | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baker Tiffany | 35 | 27 | 16 | 10 | 88 |
| Colvin Richard D. | 33 | 24 | 16 | 8 | 81 |
| johnson jeremy | 34 | 22 | 18 | 7 | 81 |
| Nagy Rebecca | 37 | 25 | 17 | 10 | 89 |
| Santiago Caroline | 38 | 19 | 20 | 10 | 87 |
| Tomor Michael | 31 | 23 | 19 | 8 | 81 |
| Wilson Jennifer | 38 | 27 | 18 | 9 | 92 |
Comments |
|
|---|---|
| Baker Tiffany - Score: 88.000 | |
|
As outlined, the program plans seem achievable in the time allowed with the support staff indicated. It appears that the Science Center has existing and robust programmatic offerings and that the arts component would build upon what already exists. In terms of accessibility and audience, the institution has a very diverse reach through partnerships with the Able Trust and other local groups. Evaluation and marketing plans could provide more more specifics, especially since the Science Center has the existing STEM curricula that has likely been evaluated and is currently marketing the existing STEM programs. Are there any marketing partnerships that currently exist that will be utilized for the current program? How was the high level of visitation achieved in the previous year? How has interest in the expanded arts programs been gauged? Because the Science Center is untested in the arts arena, the reviewer has some concerns about the interest for and sustainability of an arts program, which is reflected in the Management score. |
|
| Colvin Richard D. - Score: 81.000 | |
| {No comments provided.} | |
| johnson jeremy - Score: 81.000 | |
| {No comments provided.} | |
| Nagy Rebecca - Score: 89.000 | |
|
Proposal narratives did not always provide a lot of detail, the supplemental materials demonstrate that quality of offerings is high. Number of partners is impressive. The number of people benefitting from the project (1500) seems small given that annual attendance is over 16,000. The evaluation plan could be more specific. Economic impact is estimated at $1 million, but no details are given as to how this figure was arrived at. Budget size fluctuates significantly from year to year, but the explanation is given that this is due to grant funding and specific projects funded. |
|
| Santiago Caroline - Score: 87.000 | |
|
I am having difficulty with this application as the applicant does not have a mission that is focused on arts and culture, but rather science. While I believe in a multi-disciplinary approach, this may not be the right best grant application for this institution. "The mission of the Science Center is to inspire, motivate and stimulate innovative thinking in the areas of science, technology, engineering, math and career development for students K-12; enhancing their lives through instruction, hands-on, and experiential education delivered through partnerships with schools, corporations, universities and community. " |
|
| Tomor Michael - Score: 81.000 | |
|
Although the mission of the Science Center is to inspire, motivate and stimulate innovative thinking in the areas of science, technology, engineering, math and career development, they are requesting funds to infuse art into the Science Center Garden, suggesting adding art will make it more accessible to all members of the community. Art will be used as a vehicle for greater STEM learning. To this end, they want to hire a arts focused STEM program staff member and hire local artists, increase access to arts programs and neighborhood arts education programs. Although strong partnerships are in place, none appear to be partners in art. The proposal to integrate art makes sense, but other than the phrasing of using artists and hiring art education staff, I'm not sure what is being proposed. I am also curious about not seeing the gardens as living collections. In excellence, I imagine the Science Center excels at STEM and Science, but I am uncertain about being able to carry out this project - as much as I think it makes sense, it's not as clear to this reviewer and it is not part of its current mission. Impact seems minimized for such a project. This Impact projection of number of people benefiting must only be for the arts-based programs and not the Science Center overall? But none of the projected proposal impact or marketing and promotion sections relate to anything arts specific. The budget breakdown seems reasonable for match, but $4,000 for an artist and only $1,000 in supplies for a project that is being developed to introduce an entirely new avenue of learning over the course of the year seems completely underfunded in match. The budget for the institution as a whole appears well balanced, but for the requested project it is underdeveloped. Making sure one is doing everything possible for accessibility is important, but is the institution ADA compliant? |
|
| Wilson Jennifer - Score: 92.000 | |
|
It is wonderful to see an acknowledgment of the relationship between the arts and sciences and of the effectiveness of interdisciplinary learning opportunities to engage people who may find STEM topics offputting. It will be interesting to see how this reemergence of the science center, including its attempts to weave the arts into science programming, fares. |
|