[Skip to Content]
Ontario Arts Council (OAC)
Grants Advanced Search
Grants Advanced Search

Evaluation Rubric – Community-Engaged Projects

In the project grant assessment process, the Ontario Arts Council provides a rubric to assessors to guide them in rating applications. The rubric below is for community-engaged grant programs, which use three assessment criteria: artistic merit, impact and viability. 

The rubric is used along with the context and priorities of each grant program as they are described on the program web page. This means that some items listed may not be relevant depending on the program or proposed activity. 
 

Artistic Merit (33.4% of total score) 

Rating: Excellent (5) 

  • The bio(s)/CV(s) demonstrate that the applicant has the relevant professional or organizational background and experience to lead the project. 
  • The main artistic idea of the project is highly relevant (to the public or arts sector), distinctive, interesting or compelling. Note: Assessors consider the location and environment in which the applicant works.  
  • Artistic examples present work that is highly compelling, distinctive, and exciting, and it is clear how they relate to the project.  
  • The applicant and artistic collaborators demonstrate that they have the artistic skills necessary to complete the project at a very high artistic level. Note: Assessors consider the career stage or history of the applicant and artistic collaborators.  
  • The applicant or key collaborators bring extensive and appropriate cultural knowledge to their artistic roles in the project. Note: Where relevant, assessors consider the rights of Indigenous peoples to practice, revitalize, transmit and maintain control of their cultural material, practices and stories, as outlined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  
  • The choice of artistic collaborators is highly relevant to the proposed artistic activity, it is clear what they will bring to the project, and they have appropriate cultural knowledge.  
 

 Back to top ^

Rating: Very Good (4) 

  • The bio(s)/CV(s) demonstrate that the applicant has the relevant professional or organizational background and experience to lead the project. 
  • The main artistic idea of the project is relevant (to the public or arts sector) and interesting. Note: Assessors consider the location and environment in which the applicant works.  
  • Artistic examples present work that is interesting and distinctive, and it is clear how they relate to the project.  
  • The applicant and artistic collaborators demonstrate that they have the artistic skills necessary to complete the project at a high artistic level. Note: Assessors consider the career stage or history of the applicant and artistic collaborators.  
  • The applicant or key collaborators bring strong and appropriate cultural knowledge to their artistic roles in the project. Note: Where relevant, assessors consider the rights of Indigenous peoples to practice, revitalize, transmit and maintain control of their cultural material, practices and stories, as outlined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. 
  • The choice of artistic collaborators is relevant to the proposed artistic activity, it is clear what they will bring to the project, and they have appropriate cultural knowledge.  

 

Rating: Good (3) 

  • The bio(s)/CV(s) demonstrate that the applicant has the relevant professional or organizational background and experience to lead the project. 
  • The main artistic idea of the project is relevant (to the public or arts sector) or interesting. Note: Assessors consider the location and environment in which the applicant works.  
  • Artistic examples present work that is interesting, and it is clear how they relate to the project.  
  • The applicant and artistic collaborators demonstrate that they have the artistic skills necessary to complete the project. Note: Assessors consider the career stage or history of the applicant and artistic collaborators.  
  • The applicant or key collaborators bring appropriate cultural knowledge to their artistic roles in the project. Note: Where relevant, assessors consider the rights of Indigenous peoples to practice, revitalize, transmit and maintain control of their cultural material, practices and stories, as outlined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  
  • The choice of artistic collaborators is mostly relevant to the proposed artistic activity, it is somewhat clear what they will bring to the project, and they have appropriate cultural knowledge.  

 Back to top ^

Rating: Fair (2) 

  • The bio(s)/CV(s) do not demonstrate that the applicant has the relevant professional or organizational background and experience to lead the project. 
  • The main artistic idea of the project is not particularly relevant (to the public or arts sector), distinctive, interesting or compelling. Note: Assessors consider the location and environment in which the applicant works.  
  • Artistic examples present work that is not particularly interesting or distinctive, and it is somewhat unclear how they relate to the project.  
  • The applicant and artistic collaborators have not sufficiently demonstrated that they have the artistic skills necessary to complete the project. Note: Assessors consider the career stage or history of the applicant and artistic collaborators.  
  • It is unclear whether the applicant and key collaborators bring appropriate cultural knowledge to their artistic roles in the project. Note: Where relevant, assessors consider the rights of Indigenous peoples to practice, revitalize, transmit and maintain control of their cultural material, practices and stories, as outlined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Similarly, they consider the rights of cultural groups to maintain control over their stories, artistic material and practices.   
  • The choice of artistic collaborators is not particularly relevant to the proposed artistic activity, it is unclear what they will bring to the project, and it is unclear whether they have appropriate cultural knowledge.  


Rating: Poor (1) 

  • The bio(s)/CV(s) do not demonstrate that the applicant has the relevant professional or organizational background and experience to lead the project. 
  • The main artistic idea of the project is not relevant (to the public or arts sector), distinctive, interesting or compelling. Note: Assessors consider the location and environment in which the applicant works.  
  • Artistic examples present work that is not particularly interesting or distinctive, and it is not at all clear how they relate to the project.  
  • The applicant and artistic collaborators have not demonstrated that they have the artistic skills necessary to complete the project. Note: Assessors consider the career stage or history of the applicant and artistic collaborators.  
  • The applicant and key collaborators do not appear to bring appropriate cultural knowledge to their artistic roles in the project. Note: Where relevant, assessors consider the rights of Indigenous peoples to practice, revitalize, transmit and maintain control of their cultural material, practices and stories, as outlined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.   
  • The choice of artistic collaborators is not relevant to the proposed artistic activity, it is unclear what they will bring to the project, and they do not appear to have appropriate cultural knowledge.  

 Back to top ^


Impact (33.3% of total score) 

Rating: Excellent (5) 

  • The application clearly identifies the communities, audiences and participants who will benefit from the project and clearly explains why it will be highly relevant and meaningful to them. 
  • The project offers specific opportunities for access and engagement to artists, artistic collaborators, audiences or participants from one or more OAC priority group.  
  • The application clearly explains how the project will enable artistic collaborators to contribute in vital and meaningful ways. 
  • Relevant and practical strategies are in place to address the safety and well-being of all involved. 


Rating: Very Good (4) 

  • The application clearly identifies the communities, audiences and participants who will benefit from the project and clearly explains why it will be relevant to them. 
  • The project, when appropriate, offers general opportunities for access and engagement to artists, artistic collaborators, audiences or participants from one or more OAC priority group.  
  • The application clearly explains how the project will enable artistic collaborators to contribute in important and meaningful ways. 
  • Practical strategies are in place to address the safety and well-being of most involved. 

 

Rating: Good (3) 

  • The application identifies the communities, audiences and participants who will benefit from the project and explains why it will be relevant to them. 
  • The project, when appropriate, offers general opportunities for access and engagement to artists, artistic collaborators, audiences or participants from one or more OAC priority group  
  • The application explains how the project will enable artistic collaborators to contribute. 
  • Some strategies are in place to address the safety and well-being of the participants. 


Rating: Fair (2) 

  • The application does not clearly identify the communities, audiences and participants who will benefit from the project or does not clearly explain why it will be relevant to them. 
  • It is unclear whether the project offers opportunities for access and engagement to artists, artistic collaborators, audiences or participants from OAC priority group.  
  • The application does not clearly explain how the project will enable artistic collaborators to contribute. 
  • Few strategies are in place to address the safety and well-being of the participants. 

 

Rating: Poor (1) 

  • The application does not identify the communities, audiences and participants who will benefit from the project. 
  • The project appears inaccessible to artists, artistic collaborators, audiences or participants from OAC priority group.  
  • The application does not explain how the project will enable artistic collaborators to contribute. 
  • No strategies are in place to address safety and well-being.    

 Back to top ^
 

Viability (33.3% of total score) 

Rating: Excellent (5) 

  • The project plan is clear, detailed and realistic, includes all the major activities required for the project, and sets aside enough time and resources for each phase. 
  • When needed, collaborators are included who are well-chosen to ensure that the project can be completed. 
  • Plans for raising enough funds to complete the project, including in-kind donations if relevant, are detailed and realistic, and include a mix of revenues, when needed, that are appropriate to the project, applicant and community. 
  • Projected fees and other expenses are clearly explained, make sense, and compensate artists appropriately
  • If the project uses someone else’s artistic material or stories, the applicant has permission to use them, or has a clear and realistic plan to obtain permission. 
  • There are strong plans with enough resources to ensure the project reaches the intended audience or participants. 

 

Rating: Very Good (4) 

  • The project plan is clear, and realistic, includes all the major activities required for the project, and sets aside enough time and resources for each phase. 
  • When needed, collaborators are included who are well-chosen to ensure that the project can be completed. 
  • Plans for raising enough funds to complete the project, including in-kind donations if relevant, are realistic and include a mix of revenues, when needed, that are appropriate to the project, applicant and community. 
  • Projected fees and other expenses are clearly explained, make sense, and compensate artists appropriately
  • If the project uses someone else’s artistic material or stories, the applicant has permission to use them, or has a clear and realistic plan to obtain permission. 
  • There are good plans with enough resources to ensure the project reaches the intended audience or participants. 


Rating: Good (3) 

  • The project plan is somewhat clear and realistic, includes most major activities required for the project, and sets aside time and resources for each phase. 
  • When needed, collaborators are included who are well-chosen to ensure that the project can be completed. 
  • Plans for raising enough funds to complete the project, including in-kind donations if relevant, are somewhat realistic, and include a mix of revenues, when needed, that are appropriate to the project, applicant and community. 
  • Most projected fees and other expenses are explained, make sense and compensate artists appropriately
  • If the project uses someone else’s artistic material or stories, the applicant has a mostly realistic plan to obtain permission. 
  • There are reasonable plans with some resources to ensure the project reaches the intended audience or participants. 

 Back to top ^

Rating: Fair (2) 

  • The project plan is unclear or unrealistic, does not include most major activities required for the project, or does not set aside enough time and resources for each phase. 
  • When needed, collaborators are included but are not suited to ensure that the project can be completed. 
  • Plans for raising enough funds to complete the project, including in-kind donations if relevant, are not realistic, and do not include an appropriate mix of revenues for the project, applicant and community. 
  • Projected fees and other expenses are not explained clearly, and do not compensate artists appropriately. 
  • If the project uses someone else’s artistic material or stories, the applicant has an unclear or unrealistic plan to obtain permission. 
  • There are unrealistic plans with inadequate resources to ensure the project reaches the intended audience or participants. 

 

Rating: Poor (1) 

  • The project plan is unclear and unrealistic, does not include major activities required for the project, and does not set aside enough time and resources for each phase. 
  • Collaborators are not included when needed to ensure that the project can be completed, or they are included but not suitable for the work required of them. 
  • There are no clear plans for raising enough funds to complete the project. 
  • Projected fees and other expenses are not explained and do not compensate artists appropriately. 
  • If the project uses someone else’s artistic material or stories, the applicant does not have a plan to obtain permission. 
  • There are no plans and no resources to ensure the project reaches the intended audience or participants. 

 Back to top ^