Scores and Comments

19.c.pr.112.577

Ozilly Connections, Inc.

Application Details
Proposal Type	Specific Cultural Project - Discipline-Based
Request Amount	$25,000
Total Score	486.000
Average Score	81.000

Panelist Scores

Panelist	Excellence	Impact	Management	Accessibility	Total
Bucuvalas Tina	32	25	16	8	81
Drummond Shelly	36	24	13	10	83
Fromm Annette	30	25	18	7	80
Palkhivala Tania	36	26	15	5	82
Siegel Virginia	33	25	17	9	84
Stinson Craig	32	18	18	8	76

Comments
Bucuvalas Tina - Score: 81.000
The programming here is quite good. However, I think this organization could use some assistance with writing the application itself (e.g., pinpointing specific partners) and also with creating a better marketing plan.
Drummond Shelly - Score: 83.000
Project is well thought out, artists seem excellent and programs meet the mission well. Fifty percent growth appears ambitious. Partnerships are vague, not clearly listed. Strengthen this component in the future for a stronger grant. The score is brought down largely by the budget proposal. The budget is missing current fiscal year numbers. Line item 10 Revenue anticipates over three times growth from last completed fiscal year. This is then used as cash match for grant funding request.
Fromm Annette - Score: 80.000
This is an interesting, on-going activity. I find that the narrative is a bit hazy ... what meaning is there to the costume/dress? What secrets are held in the music and movement? It sounds good, but it's not clarified. Though the director is experienced with working with people of disabilities, how are they encouraged to participate?
Palkhivala Tania - Score: 82.000
Under Partnerships, it would be useful to identify specific institutions or individuals and describe those relationships in order for reviewers to best understand the level of engagement and support. For the Timeline, it would be helpful if you detailed what happens on an average day at the camp and the time of year the camp takes place. The Arts & Economic Prosperity Calculator could be useful to answer the instruction on the application in the Proposal Impact section for describing the economic impact of your organization and the proposal on your local community. I also do not see any explanation of outreach efforts. There is no financial data for the Current Fiscal Year in which you submitted the application. When there is such a significant variance in financials as there is in your expenses versus income for the Last Completed Fiscal Year, it is important to indicate how those expenses were met. Are admission prices going up, or do you anticipate a significant increase in attendees to account for the 70% increase in admission revenue from your Last Completed Fiscal Year to your Next Fiscal Year? All this information is critical for reviewing fiscal condition and management. Accessibility: The Section 504 Self Evaluation completion date is identified as 9/20/2017...months after this application was submitted. How exactly are your venues and programs accessible to all members of the public, particularly on camp grounds?
Siegel Virginia - Score: 84.000
The applicant's passion is clear in this application. It is a strength that the applicant looks first for Florida artists when seeking demonstrators, and the application could be made stronger by elaborating on how this event supports participants as well as local/regional/state artists. A commitment to inclusivity is also a strong part of this application. This application can be strengthened by including the ways in which activities relate to the objectives of the application, as well as more specifics about impact (economic impact especially). Portions of the budget seem incomplete or a little vague, including the current fiscal year operating budget as well as outside fees and services.
Stinson Craig - Score: 76.000
Who are the artists? What culture groups / nationalities are represented? Budget is tight. Relies heavily on Trad. Arts funding. Modest impact (825 individuals total). Partnerships with local cultural groups?