Community Arts and Cultural Development (individuals and groups)

The peers discussed the overall quality of the applications in the round and made the following comments:

• Peers recommended that applicants closely read the program guidelines – especially when applying to new programs.
• Peers noted that many of the applications did not connect to Community Arts and Cultural Development, and that more evidence of connection to communities was needed.
• Applicants were encouraged to clearly show how their activities related to Community Arts and Cultural Development and that the activities are community-led.
• The peers recommended that applicants write in Plain English and keep in mind that all applications to Arts Tasmania’s programs will be assessed by multi-artform panels of people from diverse cultural backgrounds.
• Applicants were encouraged to develop clear and itemised budgets based on industry wages and rates, and to contact Arts Tasmania about budget items, including artist wages and fees, if they were unclear.
• Stronger applications included letters of support from the community members who would be directly involved in the project, rather than letters of recommendation from associated organisations or businesses.
• Strong letters of support talked about how the activities would benefit the community, its members, and the broader local area.
• Stronger applications showed a clear understanding of the communities they were engaging, their identified needs, and showed how the proposed activity would address these needs. The peers were particularly supportive of applications that identified specific needs and applied a targeted approach to engaging communities, for example addressing issues experienced by remote, marginalised or ageing populations.
• The peers recommended that applicants talk to Arts Tasmania’s Program Officer – Aboriginal Arts if the application included plans to involve Tasmanian Aboriginal cultural content or Tasmanian Aboriginal artists.
• Applicants were encouraged to consider the Tasmanian Aboriginal community when planning projects, where relevant, and to take into consideration the consultation process when looking for feedback or participation, and that this can take time. This can be reflected in project timelines, by ensuring there is adequate flexibility for the consultation process.
• If the project includes Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander content and the applicant is not Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander, the applicant must provide a letter of support from an Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander connected to the project and show that appropriate community consultation has taken place.
• Stronger applications outlined a strong artistic vision and showed clear evidence of planning including evidence of partnerships with community groups or organisations.
• Applications relating to projects that built on established relationships or partnerships were more likely to be supported.
• Stronger applications showed a genuine commitment to diversity, reflected not only in the communities that would be engaged, but also in project teams and leadership roles.
• Stronger applications focused on outcomes for communities, community-led practice, and providing opportunities for communities to contribute in a creative or curatorial way, rather than focusing on the benefits for an industry or arts practitioner.
• Applications that included a clear rationale for selecting project teams and collaborators and showed a commitment to opportunities for a diverse range of practitioners, artists and experts, were more likely to be supported.
• Stronger applications balanced opportunities for emerging practitioners and artists with opportunities for more established practitioners and mentors.
• The peers noted that many applications focused on outcomes related to health and education, as well as artistic outcomes. Applicants working in the Community Arts and Cultural Development space were encouraged to consider the intrinsic value of the arts, and the benefits of community-based arts practice itself when speaking to benefit.
• Stronger applications considered the impact for participants at the end of the project and provided approaches to transitioning out of the project, ongoing engagement, project sustainability or expansion, and long-term opportunities and outcomes.
• Stronger applications provided sound, considered and realistic budgets reflecting the full costs of a project, and requested adequate project funding.
• Applications relating to professional development and mentorship opportunities were more likely to be supported if they included evidence of expected outcomes, and the potential benefits, relationships, and relevant application of the training.