Grants and Evaluation
The evaluation section of a proposal sets out clearly the organization’s roadmap for evaluating the success of a project or program. It answers the reader’s question, “What does success look like?” with specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely (SMART) guidelines for assessment. How will you collect data about indicators, outcomes, objectives completed, and goals achieved?
This is a very important part of the grant, because it allows the granting agency to see that you have thought clearly about how to have a real and measurable impact on some area of need that they agree is important.
Design the project evaluation before writing any proposals. If you aren’t in charge of the project, insist that the organization program staff work with you to create an evaluation process that is realistic and will satisfy grantmaker requirements. Ongoing evaluation should be “built into” (meaning it’s easy to do) the project as much as is possible and practical for the organization. In your application, show grantmakers that you consider evaluation to be part of everyone’s job.
What if you are trying to evaluate an arts program, where quantitative measurement might be difficult? How do you write about that kind of evaluation?
There’s no easy way to measure the art itself, but you could count the number of people that attend an exhibition or performance. Surveys of residents and business owners could provide a sample of neighborhood reactions to a mural or outdoor beautification effort. Surveys of event-attendees could also help gauge interest for additional, similar events, such as extending a concert series or holding an annual exhibition more frequently, due to public demand.
Taking this concept a little further, some might say that while you can’t put a value on beauty itself, you can put a value on what beauty contributes.
It’s widely acknowledged in the field of design that beauty has the power to alter perceptions. People using a tool or gadget they find visually pleasing usually report that it works better than equally functional but less pleasing alternatives. Beautification and preservation projects can be said to contribute to the overall economic potential in a neighborhood, making it a welcome place for businesses and foot-traffic.
Changing the perceptions in a neighborhood may take a while, though. Perceptions don’t often shift quickly enough to swiftly evaluate the efforts of a project after it’s completion. Surveying for peoples’ perceptions before and after might not be the best evaluation method for every grant-funded project, but it might provide additional support.
SMART is a good place to begin, but clearly most granting agencies are also going to be interested in the ROI – return on (their) investment.
While unlike a business funding a project they look to make a profit off of, the granting agency will be looking to see what their ideals and interests (look at the keywords!) are going to be getting out of the funding.
This is where SMART comes in so handy. By being able to show them exactly what your outcomes are based on your evaluations.
As for an art arts program, it is probably best to tackle something like that indirectly. You may not be able to look at the program itself quantitatively, but what about the effects on the surrounding community? Or the benefits to the artists?
Quantitative measures that can be looked at obliquely as a reflection of the funding may yield even more positive results.
Fred, I agree about tackling arts evaluation indirectly. One measure that some arts agencies have looked at is the economic impact of arts programs.
Can you or anyone else suggest other quantitative measures to look at “obliquely”?