Quality of Offerings: 25

-Past work made for other people looks professional 

-No clear documentation of their work as an individual artist - Portfolio seemed to be a mix of things by himself and for clients, unclear if anything was them as an individual artist.

-No renderings or way to visualize what the proposed project is

Impact: 20

-Many good ideas that are hard to make happen (school collaborations, but no schools named; government collaboration, but no agencies or departments or people listed). From experience, these collaborations require experience and are challenging, in this application it is not seem backed up by their track record

-no letters of support

-no confirmed partnerships

Track Record: 18

-Artist has extensive track record of producing successful installations for the company they work for, but no clear evidence of installations that is their own work as the lead artist

-CV does not show projects done by him as an individual artist, it is of job experience

The project description, goals, objectives and activities are clearly communicated and detailed in nature. One area that could be strengthened would be if the site was confirmed and a partnership had already bene established with one of the entities the applicant intends to reach out to regarding locating a site for this installation.

Something that stands out to me, is that the budget, the majority of funds will go to cover costs associated with securing equipment and insurance – gives the impression that this grant would support the artist in realizing a vision they could not carry out independently.