Skip to main content

Assessment guidelines for arts organisations

Invested Arts Organisations - Projects

These guidelines are designed to:

  • help applicants understand the sorts of things assessors may consider when assessing applications
  • serve as prompts for assessors to consider in assessing submissions against the criteria of quality and reach.

The prompts are provided only as examples of the things that assessors may consider. Applicants are not required to address all the prompts one by one in their submissions, but if they are relevant, consider how they are reflected in their applications.

It is very important to note that not all of the prompts will apply to each application and the prompts may vary slightly or be weighted differently between the different programs.

First stage

Criteria Indicator Peers may consider
Quality 100% Strength of the artistic concept, artistic practice, arts experiences and opportunities for arts practitioners
  • How strong is the artistic practice?
  • How strong is the artistic concept?
  • Is the proposed project clear – what is it, who is involved, when and where?
  • What is the artistic merit of the organisation – what is the quality of work previously produced?

Creativity – imagination, originality
  • How interesting/exciting/developmental/inventive is the proposed project?
  • Is the project original in delivery and/or content?

Progression – organisation and/or program development/consolidation fresh artistic approaches, experimentation and risk
  • How does this project develop or consolidate the organisation's area of practice?
  • How does this show the organisation's artistic progression and/or consolidation?
  • Is there appropriate risk taking or experimentation that strengthens the organisation's artistic merit?

Currency – timeliness, relevance and positioning in contemporary culture and/or sector
  • What is the context of the project?
  • Why this, why now, why in this artform/sector in Tasmania?
  • What is the significance of the project?

Second stage

Criteria Indicator The panel may consider
Quality 80%

Second stage: same as first stage, plus additional indicator under quality:

Capacity - calibre of personnel, resource and financial management, planning

  • How viable is the project?
  • Are the timelines, planning, use of resources realistic and achievable? Has sufficient evidence of this been provided?
  • Does the organisation demonstrate good governance?
  • Are other investors confirmed?
  • Is the budget realistic and accurate?
  • What is the calibre of the people involved? Why has the applicant chosen to work with them? What do they contribute to the project?
  • Is there a business plan? How strong is the business plan?
Reach 20% Audience – numbers, marketing strategy, diversity and connection
  • Is there a marketing plan? How strong is the plan – is it realistic, achievable, and strategic?
  • Is there a digital marketing strategy? Does the digital marketing strategy go beyond social media?
  • If the marketing plan includes social media, how strong is the organisation's social media presence? How many followers does it have? What is the quality of its online presence and engagement? 
  • Does the project increase or diversify the organisation's audience? How well does it do this?
  • Does it satisfy an existing audience or market demand? If so, how? If not, should it?

Engagement – participation, access, involvement of the public and/or specific audience or market sectors
  • Does the project demonstrate audience development or engagement? What is the depth/breadth of that engagement?
  • Does it increase or diversify opportunities for participation and access? e.g. is there an audience development target/strategy?
  • Does it engage communities of interest and/or communities of practice? How does it demonstrate this? How effectively has it done this in the past?
  • Are there quality opportunities for artists and arts workers to be involved/employed in the project?
  • Is there a benefit to the community created by this project?