Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.

dcarts

DC Arts
 
  • facebook
  • Follow us on X
  • instagram

FY27 CP Application and Review Information

Review Panelists 

CAH selects individuals who are arts, humanities, and/or business professionals, independent of CAH, to serve as advisory review panelists for each grant program. The role of a panelist is to review and score an eligible application’s content to the established grant program review criteria. CAH’s grant application evaluation process takes into consideration general standards of decency and respect for the diverse beliefs and values of the American public consistent with The National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities Act, as amended in 1990. For more information regarding the grant review process please visit the Guide to Grants. To volunteer or nominate a person to serve as an advisory review panelist for a grant program, see CAH’s Call for Panelists.  

Criteria, Review and Selection Process 

The Agency reserves the right to accept or deny any or all applications if the Agency determines it is in the best interest of the Agency to do so.  The Agency shall notify the applicant if it rejects that applicant’s proposal.  The Agency may suspend or terminate an outstanding RFA pursuant to its own grantmaking rule(s) or any applicable federal regulation or requirement. The Agency may conduct pre-award on-site visits to verify information submitted in the application and to determine if the applicant’s facilities are appropriate for the services intended. If there are any conflicts between the terms and conditions of the RFA and any applicable federal or local law or regulation, or any ambiguity related thereto, then the provisions of the applicable law or regulation shall control, and it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance.  

Each application shall be reviewed as detailed below. 

Project Content & Merit (30%) 

Description: 

  • The proposed project aligns with the goals outlined in the Small Capital Projects RFA. (10%) 

  • The project is financially viable, with any matching funds committed or able to be raised during the grant period. (10%) 

  • The project details a reasonable and inclusive project timeline. (10%) 

Reviewer Considerations: 

  • How does this project promote stability, sustainable growth, and longevity of the District’s arts and humanities organizations? 

  • How does this project preserve and strengthen structures, systems, and infrastructure for District arts and humanities organizations, their constituents, and their collections? 

  • How does this project ensure access to high-quality physical spaces and equipment for the District’s arts and humanities organizations? 

  • How does this project reduce the risk of organizational displacement? 

  • Evaluate the quality, relevance, and clarity of the proposed project.  

  • How has this application articulated a detailed and reasonable timeline for their project execution? 

 

Capacity & Sustainability (20%) 

Description: 

  • The application demonstrates through support materials and financial documents the appropriate oversight, financial controls, and governance to execute the proposed project. (10%) 

  • The application demonstrates the organization has the necessary expertise and administrative personnel in place to execute the proposed project. (10%) 

Reviewer Considerations: 

  • How does the application demonstrate capacity in governance and management to complete the project (consider personnel, policies, marketing, operations, and financial controls)? 

  • To what extent do the application’s operation and design processes include all relevant stakeholders? 

  • Does the application clearly articulate an understanding of the project’s impact on the organization’s future finances and operations?  

  • Are the project costs informed, itemized, thorough, and reasonable, based on the grant narratives and the attached materials? 

  • What evidence is provided in this application that shows the applicant understands the project they are proposing and can execute high-quality results and/or outcomes? 

 

Community Access & Engagement (20%) 

Description: 

  • The proposed project demonstrates intentionality in ensuring programmatic accessibility for diverse communities. (10%) 

  • The application demonstrates how the proposed project will benefit the organization and further enable its centering of the District for residents and visitors alike. (10%) 

Reviewer Considerations: 

  • How does the application demonstrate a proven commitment to community and culture?  

  • In what way or to what degree does this project increase access for DC residents (consider categories such as geography, race and ethnicity, ability, and discipline)? 

  • How does this project increase arts and humanities residential and/or studio spaces? 

 

Community Impact (30%) 

Description: 

  • The application includes qualitative and quantitative evaluation strategies to determine community impact resulting from this project (15%) 

  • The application details how changes implemented through this project’s execution will ensure continued and future growth for the organization. (15%) 

Reviewer Considerations: 

  • How does the application demonstrate that this project will enhance meaningful arts and/or humanities programming with a strong impact on the District’s residents and visitors? 

  • How is this project tailored to the unique aspects and features of its location in the District? If a registered historic entity, how does the project accommodate preservation and conservation needs? 

  • How does the application demonstrate the potential community impact that will result from this project and how do they intend to measure this impact? 

View Application and Submission Information <— | —> View Award Administration Information

View CP Grant Main Page