Evaluation Rubric – Operating Programs

Artistic and/or Service Quality 25% 

Rating: Excellent (5)

• The organization’s mandate and vision are vital and relevant.
• Its achievements, initiatives, current activities and future plans are exemplary and embody its mandate and vision.
• The organization’s activities (creation, presentation, distribution of artistic work and/or the delivery of art services) are of excellent quality, challenge the field and influence the practice of other organizations.
• The organization is a leader in the development and/or presentation of Ontario and Canadian artistic work.

Rating: Very Good (4)

• The organization’s mandate and vision are clear and precise.
• Its achievements, initiatives, current activities and future plans are ambitious and embody its mandate and vision.
• The organization’s activities (creation, presentation, distribution of artistic work and/or the delivery of art services) are of very good quality and contribute meaningfully to the field.
• The organization shows a consistent commitment to the development and/or presentation of Ontario and Canadian artistic work.

Rating: Good (3)

• The organization’s mandate and vision are clear.
• Its achievements, initiatives, current activities and future plans are relevant to its mandate and vision.
• The organization’s activities (creation, presentation, distribution of artistic work and/or the delivery of art services) are generally of good quality and contribute somewhat to the field.
• The organization shows a certain commitment to the development and/or presentation of Ontario and Canadian artistic work.

Rating: Below Average (2)

• The organization’s mandate and vision are unclear or not relevant.
• It is unclear how the organization’s achievements, initiatives, current activities and future plans fulfill its mandate and vision.
• The organization’s activities (creation, presentation, distribution of artistic work and/or the delivery of art services)  somewhat insufficient and generally of below average quality  or contribute modestly to the field.
• The organization shows a limited commitment to the development and/or presentation of Ontario and Canadian artistic work.

Rating: Serious Concerns (1)

• The organization’s mandate and vision are unclear or not relevant.
• Its achievements, initiatives, current activities and future plans are unrelated to its mandate and vision.
• The organization’s activities (creation, presentation, distribution of artistic work and/or the delivery of art services) are insufficient or generally of poor quality or do not contribute to the field. 
• The organization does not show a commitment to the development and/or presentation of Ontario and Canadian artistic work.

Contribution to Artistic Field and Role within Community  30% 

Rating: Excellent (5)

• The organization has a demonstrated and profound impact on artists, communities, audiences and/or participants.
• It provides vital support for Ontario artists through significant opportunities for production, presentation, engagements, professional development or other services.
• It prioritizes the interests of artists in determining fees for Ontario-based artists (including paying cancellation fees when necessary and feasible).
• Its activities provide opportunities for broad and meaningful access and engagement for audiences and/or participants.
• It provides opportunities for meaningful and mutually beneficial collaboration and exchange across disciplines, communities, and audiences.

Rating: Very Good (4)

• The organization has a demonstrated and strong impact on artists, communities, audiences and/or participants.
• It provides significant support for Ontario artists through substantial opportunities for production, presentation, engagements, professional development or other services.
• It considers the interests of artists in determining fees for Ontario-based (including paying cancellation fees when necessary and feasible).
• Its activities provide opportunities for broad access and engagement for audiences and/or participants.
• It provides opportunities for mutually beneficial collaboration and exchange across disciplines, communities, and audiences.

Rating: Good (3)

• The organization has a some demonstrated impact on artists, communities, audiences and/or participants.
• It provides support for Ontario artists through adequate opportunities for production, presentation, engagements, professional development or other services.
• It is fair and consistent in determining fees for Ontario-based artists (including paying cancellation fees when necessary and feasible).
• Its activities provide some opportunities for access and engagement for audiences and/or participants.
• It provides some opportunities for collaboration and exchange across disciplines, communities, and audiences.

Rating: Below Average (2)

• The organization has a modest or unclear impact on artists, communities, audiences and/or participants.
• It provides modest support for Ontario artists through limited opportunities for production, presentation, engagements, professional development or other services.
• It does not consistently pay appropriate fees to Ontario-based artists.
• Its activities provide limited opportunities for access and engagement for audiences and/or participants.
• It provides limited opportunities for collaboration and exchange across disciplines, communities, and audiences.

Rating: Serious Concerns (1)

• The organization has a weak impact or no impact on artists, communities, audiences and/or participants.
• It provides Ontario artists with few or no opportunities for production, presentation, engagements, professional development or other services.
• It does not pay appropriate artist fees.
• Its activities provide few or no opportunities for access and engagement for audiences and participants.
• It does not provide opportunities for collaboration and exchange across disciplines, communities, or audiences.

Contribution to OAC Priority Groups 25%   

Rating: Excellent (5)

• The organization demonstrates exemplary leadership and commitment to OAC priority groups by having, as appropriate based on the mandate, activities and location of the organization:
  • strong representation in senior leadership positions (staff and/or board) of individuals who identify with one or more OAC priority groups
  • impressive achievements, initiatives, current activities and future plans that support one or more OAC priority groups
  • programming and artist involvement (including partnerships and collaborations) that reflect strong, reciprocal and sustained relationships with artists, communities, audiences and/or participants from one or more OAC priority groups

Rating: Very Good (4)

• The organization demonstrates significant commitment to OAC priority groups by having, as appropriate based on the mandate, activities and location of the organization: 
  • some representation in senior leadership positions (staff and/or board) of individuals who identify with one or more OAC priority groups
  • important achievements, initiatives, current activities and future plans that support one or more OAC priority groups
  • programming and artist involvement (including partnerships and collaborations) that reflect genuine relationships with artists, communities, audiences and/or participants from one or more OAC priority groups

Rating: Good (3)

• The organization demonstrates some genuine and sustained action in support of OAC priority groups by having, as appropriate based on the mandate, activities and location of the organization: 
  • some representation in senior leadership positions (staff and/or board) of individuals who identify with one or more OAC priority groups
  • some achievements, initiatives, current activities and future plans that support one or more OAC priority groups
  • programming and artist involvement that reflect an effort to development positive relationships (including partnerships and collaborations) with artists, communities, audiences and/or participants from one or more OAC priority groups

Rating: Below Average (2)

• The organization shows minimal and inconsistent commitment to OAC priority groups, having:
  • inadequate representation in senior leadership positions (staff and/or board) of individuals who identify with one or more OAC priority groups, as appropriate based on the mandate, activities and location of the organization 
  • limited achievements, initiatives, current activities or future plans that support OAC priority groups
  • limited programming and involvement (including partnerships and collaborations) with artists from OAC priority groups, reflecting a lack of constructive relationships with artists, communities, audiences and/or participants from OAC priority groups

Rating: Serious Concerns (1)

• The organization does not demonstrate commitment to OAC priority groups, having:
  • no individuals in senior leadership positions (staff and board) who identify with one or more OAC priority groups
  • no achievements, initiatives, current activities or future plans that support OAC priority groups
  • minimal or no programming or involvement of artists from OAC priority groups, reflecting an absence of relationships with artists, communities, audiences and/or participants from OAC priority groups

Administrative and Financial Viability 20%    

Rating: Excellent (5) 

• The organization has sound financial strategies and sufficient resources to execute organizational plans and manage financial obligations, cash flow and risk.
• Board and staff skills and expertise are appropriate for the size and scope of the organization.
• The organization’s internal structures, policies and processes contribute significantly to the safety and well-being of staff, contractors, board members and volunteers.
• The level of board governance, oversight, support and involvement is appropriate for the size and scope of the organization.
• Human and financial resources are allocated strategically.
• The organization demonstrates forward-thinking planning based on the current context and responds in innovative ways to changes in circumstances, including staff and board transitions.

Rating: Very Good (4)

• The organization has sound financial strategies and sufficient resources to execute organizational plans and manage financial obligations, cash flow and risk.
• Board and staff skills and expertise are appropriate for the size and scope of the organization.
• The organization’s internal structures, policies and processes contribute to the safety and well-being of staff, contractors, board members and volunteers.
• The level of board governance, oversight, support and involvement is appropriate for the size and scope of the organization.
• Human and financial resources are allocated wisely.
• The organization demonstrates realistic planning based on the current context and responds thoughtfully to changes in circumstances, including staff and board transitions.

Rating: Good (3)

• The organization has reasonably sound financial strategies and demonstrates the ability to obtain necessary resources to execute organizational plans and manage financial obligations, cash flow and risk.
• Board and staff skills and expertise are sufficient for the size and scope of the organization.
• The organization’s internal structures, policies and processes contribute in some ways to the safety and well-being of staff, contractors, board members and volunteers.
• The level of board governance, oversight, support and involvement is appropriate for the size and scope of the organization.
• The organization pays sufficient attention to the appropriate allocation of human and financial resources.
• The organization demonstrates mostly realistic planning based on the current context and responds appropriately to changes in circumstances, including staff and board transitions.

Rating: Below Average (2)

• The organization has vague or underdeveloped financial strategies, and it is not clear that they have the ability to obtain necessary resources to execute organizational plans and manage financial obligations, cash flow and risk.
• The board and staff’s skills and expertise are inappropriate for the size and scope of the organization.
• The organization’s internal structures, policies and processes insufficiently contribute to the safety and well-being of staff, contractors, board members and volunteers.
• The level of board governance, oversight, support and involvement is inappropriate for the size and scope of the organization.
• The organization pays insufficient attention to the appropriate allocation of human and financial resources.
• The organization demonstrates unrealistic planning based on the current context and responds ineffectively to changes in circumstances, including staff and board transitions.

Rating: Serious Concerns (1)

• The organization has unrealistic financial strategies and is unable to obtain necessary resources to execute organizational plans and manage financial obligations, cash flow and risk.
• The board and staff’s skills and expertise are inappropriate for the size and scope of the organization.
• The organization’s internal structures, policies and processes do not contribute to the safety and well-being of staff, contractors, board members and volunteers.
• The level of board governance, oversight, support and involvement is inappropriate for the size and scope of the organization.
• The organization pays little or no attention to the appropriate allocation of human and financial resources.
• The organization demonstrates unrealistic planning based on the current context and is unable to respond to changes in circumstances, including staff and board transitions.