Date: Apr. 24, 2014To: Professor Linn BekinsFrom: Bafreen Doski

Lydia C. OrtegaMichael BenedettoJames Eunsong Um

Subject: Usability Test Report on grant writing for ArtReach San Diego

Summary

The purpose of this document is to report on the findings of the tests to measure the effectiveness of a grant draft for ArtReach San Diego. Our primary objective of the usability test is to improve the quality of the grant by using the feedback from testers. We conducted the usability test through a well-prepared questionnaire with four testers. Based on the test results, we will revise the grant draft as our final deliverable.

Test Methodology

The Grant Usability test originated as a project with ArtReach San Diego. As a non-profit organization, ArtReach San Diego is constantly looking to continue its free workshop based art education classes. To do so, they raise funds from projects, donors, or apply for grants. In working with ArtReach San Diego as part of a project for our writing class, our team decided to write a grant for The Farrell Family Foundation (FFF).

The grant draft written based on the grant guideline of the FFF was distributed to each usability tester with a separate set of survey questions which were matched with the professional specialization of each tester. The questionnaire asked whether the grant draft was readable, engaging, professional, and presentable for an audience of donors. Testers were given two weeks to review the draft proposal and provide commentary and suggestions.

Test Objective

The object of this usability test was to improve our grant proposal for ArtReach in appealing to the FFF by incorporating the feedback from four selected testers. The grant proposal should meet the following criteria based on the FFF's guidelines:

• Clarity of Purpose – ArtReach’s request for funding must be clearly stated with a description of the goals/tasks to be completed as well as a description of how the funding will achieve these goals/tasks. A budget must also be included.

• Potential for Success – The grant proposal must demonstrate ArtReach's access to additional resources, manpower, and community support to achieve its goals. The projects must be genuine and tangible.

• Leadership – The grant proposal must demonstrate ArtReach’s leadership as well as a solid reputation for producing results that reflect effective management.

1

• Financial Stability – The grant proposal must highlight ArtReach’s outstanding record of financial stability, which is a highly desired attribute for the FFF. The FFF also requires any potential organization to provide its financial statements before any funding is awarded.

• Measurements and Results – The FFF requires monitoring and reporting of milestones on any major gifts pledged over a period of time. A semi-annual report as well as a final report at the end of the project will also be required. The reports must outline how the funds were used as well as the overall achievements of the project.

Usability Testers

All of our usability testers are professional grant writers with real-world experience working alongside non-profit and for-profit organizations.

• First reader: Associate Professor and Director of the Certificate of Professional Writing as San Diego State University

• Second Reader: Former grant writer for Brooklyn Academy of Music and the American Museum of Natural History in New York City

• Third Reader: Professor at San Diego State University and Professional Grant Writer

• Fourth Reader (and final approver for grant qualifications): ArtReach Director

Results

The survey results from our second reader are included as part of “Appendix C: Usability Tester Questionnaires.” From these results, it is clear that some sections have been more successful than others.

More specifically, the “Future Funding” and “Monitoring/Evaluation” sections received high scores, whereas the “Goals and Objectives” and “Implementation and Work Plan” sections need further revision. This is most likely due to the fact that these are often the hardest sections for grant writers of all skill levels to finalize.

Due to the complex nature of our final deliverable, our most valuable feedback was received as written commentary in the grant draft itself. Feedback from all testers made it clear that following the guidelines set by the FFF is crucial. Making sure that each section is direct in its intention, clear, and concise is also a top priority.

The feedback we received from our fourth reader, ArtReach’s director, was invaluable in that it not only pinpointed areas that needed improvement, but it also provided additional information about the organization to help fill any gaps. Feedback both from our first and third readers offered a great deal of advice regarding the finer points of straightforward professional writing.

Recommendations

2

To begin the grant writing process, our team met with ArtReach’s director, reviewed the available information concerning ArtReach, and each performed the necessary research to write two specific sections of the grant proposal. Now that the first draft is completed, it is the responsibility of all members of the group to ensure that the grant functions as a uniform and coherent document.

Our group will now meet to review the recommendations made by the usability testers and fine tune each section together to ensure clarity of purpose and effective rhetorical and grammatical construction. With all of the members of our group taking responsibility for the document as a whole, it is our hope that the final grant will be a more comprehensive and effective document.

3

Appendix A: The Farrell Family Foundation Grant Guidelines

FARRELL FAMILY FOUNDATIONPROPOSAL CONTENT

Please limit this section of the application to no more than four pages. Conciseness and clarity are appreciated.

Organization’s Mission and Vision Statements

Briefly summarize the objectives of the organization and the scopes of its current mission andPrograms

Provide a brief summary of the specific program for which you are applying for funding

NEEDClearly describe the need for the program, using statistics and other background material. What otherwise unmet needs are you addressing? Are there other resources in the community that meet this need? How will your program differ from or complement other programs? What would the community do if this program was not established or did not exist?

GOALS AND OBJECTIVESClearly and realistically state what this program will accomplish. Be sure that the objectives are the problem-related outcomes of your activities, not the methods. Objectives should be specific and measurable and should include the target population.

IMPLEMENTATION AND WORK PLANDescribe in specific terms the activities or steps you will take to carry out the program. How will these activities meet the stated need? Indicate the program’s time frame. What measureable3 milestones will be met? Describe in detail staffing requirements. What are the staff’s qualifications? How will volunteers be used?

QUANTIFIABLE INDICATORSHow many people are expected to be served? Be specific. If the program has several activities, provide indicators for each one.

MONITORING/EVALUATIONHow do you plan to measure the degree to which objectives are met and methods are followed (quantitative and qualitative results)? Who will evaluate the program and how will it be done?Who will be responsible for providing a report to the Farrell Family Foundation outlining the measured outcomes and results within six month of the grant payment?

OTHER FUNDING SOURCESHow much has already been raised for the program and from whom? What other foundations, individuals or corporations have you approached for funding this program?

FUTURE FUNDINGHow will ongoing funding for the program be secured? What will happen to the program if funding is not secured from the Farrell Family Foundation?

4

5

Appendix B: Grant Draft for ArtReach San Diego

Executive Summary[To be created upon completion of final draft.]

Mission and Vision StatementArtReach’s main mission is simple: connect underprivileged students from low-income schools to visual arts education resources taught by professional working artists.

"High-quality arts education is absolutely critical to providing all students with a world-class education.” This quote from the U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is a testament to the benefit of visual arts education to our evolving culture. Our vision is to establish well-rounded and creatively aware students that are prepared to enter a changing workforce in need of collaborative critical thinkers for future innovation. Our vision includes the following features: professional artists as teachers, low or no-cost programs, and a standards-based arts education curriculum that emphasizes originality, networking, and collaboration.

Every year paints different scenarios for ArtReach’s ability to reach its goals. Next year, we aim to provide 11 schools with free workshops that serve 25 to 35 students on average. Each workshop consists of six classes with two working days per workshop. To fulfill our budgetary needs, ArtReach is applying for a grant in the arts program.

Needs StatementArtReach began in 2007 for one specific purpose: to supplement a gap in creative learning. We aim to better educate elementary school students in creative and collaborative critical thinking skills that slowly became overshadowed by impending budget cuts. While Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (“STEM”) is often portrayed as the future track of education, there still lacks confidence and faith in the benefit that visual arts education has in establishing a marketable student. Ultimately, ArtReach serves the community of San Diego as the forerunner for a balanced visual arts education dedicated in aiding all students with a world-class education.

In a 2012 National Center for Education Statistics (“NCES”) report, it was reported that arts education reduces discipline problems and increases the odds of college ready students likely to graduate from a post-secondary institution. In looking beyond the needs of elementary school students, ArtReach bases its principles on precedented articles that show that a student’s involvement in visual arts education increases their odds of being recognized for academic achievements, participating in mathematics or in science fairs, scoring higher on Standardized Admission Tests (SATs), and becoming creatively confident when producing their own essays or poems. With this in mind, achieving a high-quality visual arts education requires a strong dedication to and awareness of communal needs as well as a strong commitment to providing students with a much needed supplementary curriculum.

In overcoming state and local fiscal budgetary cuts, current school districts still do not have essential resources, materials, or professional Teaching Artists to maintain a balanced education

6

with visual arts. This is where ArtReach fills in the creative gap. Unlike other similar art programs, such as San Diego Museum of Art’s lessons on art history, Young Audiences of San Diego’s multi-genre arts lessons, and Art Corps’s art training video lessons, that offer visual arts education to schools, ArtReach’s Teaching Artists are local San Diego county community members who are specially trained and hired to work in art. Their favorable locale in being close to any of the 42 school districts in San Diego as well as their invaluable teaching, artistic, and communal neighborhood experience lays a creative educational foundation for over 130,000 enrolled elementary school students in the San Diego Unified School District’s 118 elementary schools.

ArtReach believes that every student is entitled to visual art education regardless of income. As such, there are two audiences ArtReach targets: 1) low income (Title I) schools or other schools without foundations and other fundraising entities and 2) schools and districts with the ability to pay. Low income students are our highest priority since their needs require more out of our funding to pay for student workshops, art supplies and materials, and other miscellaneous art expenses. Schools and districts with the ability to pay are charged the lowest cost possible for workshops and supplies. From our past collaborations with paying schools, we determined that workshops for 120 students cost on average $7.25 per student.

Ultimately, visual arts education “boosts academic outcomes” while building “stronger cities and communities” and boosting “civic engagement.” The first ArtReach workshop in 2007 proved a great success for students by demonstrating hands on creation, critical thinking skills, self-esteem, collaboration, and stress management—all by having fun and learning. ArtReach aids schools in creating well-rounded individuals that are ready to promote original ideas, opinions, innovations, and interdisciplinary cooperation in his or her community and school.

A community being able to think creatively is a better community. ArtReach helps the community by teaching young individuals how to create something original and creative. Originality and creativity is a resume essential for scientists, engineers, politicians, business leaders, teachers and any other problem solver. Despite current budget restrictions, San Diego schools can count on ArtReach as being a part of the arts education network that helps keep the arts a vital cultural moment in the San Diego area.

Goals and ObjectivesThe goal of the ongoing K-6 school project is to supply free workshops to schools with little to no visual arts education. Students grade level will vary because we enable the schools to determine which classes participate. These workshops will give students the ability to experience hands-on and one-on-one visual arts education that they otherwise would not have due to school budget cuts. Students will accomplish the following during this project:

• participating in visual arts learning and understand the importance of creativity

• learning that everyone can be successful at artistic expression

• interacting with a professional teaching artist in a safe and fun environment

• creating original work after learning basic knowledge from the workshops

7

Along with student accomplishments, the K-6 school projects will give teachers the ability to create standard-based lessons that allow students’ imaginations to run wild. These workshops will aid teacher to help increase creative thinking amongst their students by:

• giving feedback about student engagement in the project• helping teachers tailor lessons to student needs• incorporating more creative ways of problem solving in the classroom

At ArtReach, we believe every child deserves a visual arts education and with the ongoing K-6 school project, hundreds of student will get the opportunity to explore their inner creativity.

Implementation and Work Plan/MethodsWe will seek out underserved schools with little to no visual arts program. These schools will be within San Diego County and each school will decide up to six classes that will participate in the program. Each class may consist of 25-35 students. Our goal is to provide free workshops at 11 schools throughout a one year span. Each program will consist of up to five workshops with each workshop taking about two days. A sample schedule of a workshop series would go as followed:

• Workshop 1: Color, line, shape with oil pastels• Workshop 2: Radiating lines/repeating shapes using complementary colors with markers• Workshop 3: Still life with chalk pastels• Workshop 4: Hand Self-Portrait of collage• Workshop 5: Building a clay pot

Because each workshop builds on previous workshop concepts, the end result is a full basic comprehension of what art entails. After the course of the program, students will be able to understand and apply basic art knowledge to their everyday lives.

Our workshops are taught by professional teaching artists who make a living creating art and are some of the region’s most talented. This gives students a rare opportunity to meet professional artists and look at their artwork. In addition, volunteers may be asked to join the workshops to help the teaching artists. We have a great group of volunteers ready to make a difference.

At the end of each project program, teachers will be given an evaluation to complete as well as get feedback on student perceptions. These returned evaluations help ArtReach create programs that truly fit the needs of the curriculum, as well as inspire teachers and students.

Quantifiable IndicatorsWith our goal of providing free workshops to eleven schools over the coming year, it is our hope that at least 4,000 students will be able to engage in free, quality visual arts education through ArtReach. We provide at least five two-day workshops per school, and six classes attend each workshop throughout this period accompanied by a teacher. Most often, the classes that ArtReach works with have around 25 to 35 students.

8

Since 2008 and through this past year, ArtReach has been able to provide free visual arts education to a growing number of students. In addition, students benefit from ArtReach’s programs through paid workshops and festivals like Mission Federal ArtWalk and Art San Diego. These varied programs have allowed ArtReach to provide quality visual arts education to almost 25,000 students and counting.

Number of Students and Families Served by ArtReach

Year Free Lessons Paid Festivals* Total

2008 470 0 1200 1670

2008 - 09 199 560 1300 2059

2009 - 10 1426 2238 1736 5400

2010 - 11 1289 1891 1400 4580

2011 - 12 2294 814 1010 4118

2012 - 13 3932 2225 900 7057

Totals 9610 7728 7546 24884

Monitoring/EvaluationArtReach and its Teaching Artists strive to provide quality visual arts education to every student that attends workshop, and evaluative feedback from teachers and classes help to maintain these high standards.

After each ArtReach workshop, the participating teachers receive an evaluation form. In addition to this feedback, teachers are encouraged to record and share the students’ perceptions of the program. All feedback is seriously considered and used to help ArtReach fit the curriculum needs of teachers and to give an unsurpassed visual arts experience to students. If ArtReach receives negative feedback regarding a workshop, it will be investigated immediately, but to date we have received no negative evaluations.

ArtReach participates in the San Diego County Office of Education’s Arts Education Roundtable (AERO). AERO’s Visual and Performing Arts coordinator, Ron Jesse, provides excellent training for non-profit arts education programs that offer services to schools in the area. This group offers guidelines for what constitutes the highest quality in arts education, and ArtReach, as a participating organization, takes part in self-evaluations with these standards in mind. AERO has been instrumental in developing the ArtReach program, and we will continue to participate in workshops, self-evaluations, and peer critiques provided by this organization in order to provide the best art education experience for our students.

9

Other Funding SourcesApproximately $56,000 have been raised or committed from individual donors, foundations, corporations, and government agencies between July 2012 and June 2013.

We have approached the following foundations, businesses & organizations, and government agencies for this program.

Foundations:• Cox Cares• Eastman Family Foundation• Mirandon Foundation• Ramona Community Foundation

• Qualcomm• Target• Torrey Pines Children’s Liberal Arts Foundation

Businesses & Organizations• ArtWalk San Diego• Bird Rock Coffee Roasters• Bird Rock Artists Guild• Blick Art Materials• Chemistry PR• CityBeat Magazine• DaVita Kidney Care• Festivities Catering• Gap/Banana Republic• Helmuth Projects• Imagination Entertainment

• Knockaround• Lincoln Motor Company• Mia Francesca Del Mar• Mission Federal Credit Union• On Assignment Studios• Picture it On Canvas• San Diego Art Department• The Westgate Hotel• UBS

• Via Design

Government Agencies:• San Diego County Neighborhood, Reinvestment Program

Future FundingIn addition to recurring funding commitments and increased individual support, ArtReach has a variety of funding sources, including fundraising partnerships, fundraising events such as galas, art auctions, and performances, grant writing, and workshop income. Providing elementary school students with more opportunities to develop their creative visual skills through a quality arts education requires the expansion of funding sources from a larger pool of investors. ArtReach will always be on the lookout for creative partnerships and funding opportunities.

10

Appendix C: Usability Tester Questionnaires

Participant Survey Questions for Ms. Dani Heinemeyer 1. After reading the objectives of the organization and the scope of its current mission and programs, do you feel you understand ArtReach’s main goal?

Yes, I do understand the goal. There’s a lot of great information here—however, it feels a bit like it comes in pieces, instead of being clear immediately. I think some of the information could be reorganized and clarified. For example, in the mission and vision statement section, you should state what year ArtReach was founded right up front. I would recommend also moving the overall number of students whom ArtReach has reached since its inception, as well as its other programs like ArtWalk and Art San Diego, from page four to this section. They are not indicators as much as they are the history and background of the organization. (Also, I don’t think the chart is necessary—just saying that ArtReach has reached nearly 25,000 students since its inception is powerful enough.)

I would also broaden the scope of the goal in this section, since you delve into specifics later in the proposal. For example, I would recommend saying something like, “Each year, ArtReach provides up to [number of] K—6 students across San Diego with [number of] hands-on visual arts workshops, ranging from painting to pottery.”

Finally, one comment on the vision: it seemed odd to me that the vision includes language about preparing students to enter a changing workforce, when the students are only elementary-aged. Really, isn’t the objective to just spark innovation and creative thinking that can last through their lifetimes? I’d perhaps change the wording of that here.

2. Do you feel the description of other funding sources makes ArtReach seem like a sustainable organization?

Yes, the funding sources section clearly demonstrates that ArtReach is actively seeking to identify new sources of funding. With the funding that’s already been committed, I would recommend providing specific names. In terms of the potential funders, the list is overwhelming and I would recommend paring it down to just a few examples. For example, something like, “We are also exploring additional funding from a range of foundation, corporate, and government sources, including X, Y, and Z, as well as in-kind support from X and Y.”

3. Do you feel the evaluation plan described provides enough quantifiable evaluative measures?

I would recommend providing examples of the types of questions that are included in these evaluations. Do these evaluations include classroom teachers AND teaching artists? This would be good to clarify. Does ArtReach ever conduct student evaluations? Is the program ever offered in the same school as prior years, in which case you can track the students throughout the program?

Also, the guidelines ask who will be responsible for reporting to the Foundation, so I would include a staff member from ArtReach here.

11

Side note: if there are any good quotes from past teacher evaluations that exemplify what a great program this is, those would be powerful to include in this section.

4. From your grant writing experience, which section would you recommend needs improvement or further inquiry?

I think the implementation and work plan section can be reworked. The first paragraph is just a repeat of what we already know, so I think that can be cut. Then, before you go into the sample workshop schedule, which is great, I’d recommend including a timeline. For example, if the grant period is July 1, 2014—June 30, 2015, something like this:

July 2014: determine which schools will be participating in ArtReach

August 2014: Identify [number of] highly skilled and experienced teaching artists

September 2014—March 2015: conduct 66 workshops at 11 schools for up to 2,300 students

September 2014—March 2015: Assist classroom teachers in creation of lesson plans; conduct evaluation throughout

This is rough, but gives you an idea of the kind of timeline I think they’re looking for.

In the teaching artist paragraph, I think examples of previous teaching artists would be helpful here—not necessarily names, but their teaching and artmaking experience.

Finally, the last paragraph is unnecessary since it’s repeated in the evaluation section.

5. What other information not indicated here would you feel funders would like to see in this kind of documentation?

In the goals and objectives section, since these are classroom activities, I think it’s important to indicate whether or not the workshops follow state and national learning standards.

In the other funding sources section, I’d include the overall budget number for the program. You state that $56,000 has been raised, but this doesn’t mean much out of context of what the budget is.

Also, if you have any images of past student work, or examples of lesson plans, those would be great to include as attachments.

6. Is there any other information you would like to add? (Please feel free to use as much space as you need).

I wanted to make one comment on the needs section. In the part where you’re commenting on how ArtReach’s program is different than other visual arts programs in San Diego, it didn’t really ring true to say that ArtReach is different because the teaching artists are local community members trained and hired to work in art. I’d imagine that these

12

programs have skilled and experienced teaching artists, as well. Perhaps instead of focusing on the teaching artists, you can focus on the content of the program—maybe the program teaches a variety of visual arts techniques not taught in these other programs, or is specifically targeted to K-6 students, when those other programs are not. Something along those lines.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 NOTE: Please continue to the survey below. 

13

Listed below are features of the ArtReach grant. Please circle the number that best describes your opinion.

Strongly Agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly

DisagreeThe implementation and work plan are clear and concise. 5 4 3 2 1ArtReach’s programs address unmet needs. 5 4 3 2 1Goals and Objectives are clear and precise. 5 4 3 2 1The summary best describes which program this grant is applying for. 5 4 3 2 1

The amount of people listed as those to be served is a reasonable number. 5 4 3 2 1

How the program will be monitored and evaluated is clear. 5 4 3 2 1

The methods and data ArtReach will implement are justified. 5 4 3 2 1

The project timeline is realistic. 5 4 3 2 1Future Funding shows a clear motivation for maintaining project sustainability. 5 4 3 2 1

  Completed Survey:

Listed below are features of the ArtReach grant. Please circle the number that best describes your opinion.

Strongly Agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly

DisagreeThe implementation and work plan are clear and concise. 5 4 3 2 1ArtReach’s programs address unmet needs. 5 4 3 2 1Goals and Objectives are clear and precise. 5 4 3 2 1The summary best describes which program this grant is applying for. 5 4 3 2 1

The amount of people listed as those to be served is a reasonable number. 5 4 3 2 1

How the program will be monitored and evaluated is clear. 5 4 3 2 1

The methods and data ArtReach will implement are justified. 5 4 3 2 1

The project timeline is realistic. 5 4 3 2 1Future Funding shows a clear motivation for maintaining project sustainability. 5 4 3 2 1

Participant Survey Questions for Professor Steve Merriam 

1. Does the introduction and description of ArtReach and its goals establish appropriate ethos? 

 

14

2. Do you feel ArtReach’s goals and objectives are realistic as described in the grant?  

 

3. Do you feel the “Monitoring and Evaluation” section realistically describes ArtReach’s evaluative process? 

 

4. Based on the information provided, are you convinced that ArtReach is a sustainable NPO worthy of future funding? 

 

5. Which section would you suggest needs further inquiry? 

 

6. Are there any sections you feel are incomplete? 

 

7. What would be your overall opinion of the grant for ArtReach? 

 

8. Is there any other information you would like to add? (Please feel free to use as much space as you need.) 

Participant Survey Questions for Dr. Linn Bekins

1. Does the introduction and description of ArtReach and its goals establish appropriate ethos?

2. Do you feel ArtReach’s goals and objectives are realistic as described in the grant?

15

3. Do you feel the “Monitoring and Evaluation” section realistically describes ArtReach’s evaluative process?

4. Based on the information provided, are you convinced that ArtReach is a sustainable NPO worthy of future funding?

5. Which section would you suggest needs further inquiry?

6. Are there any sections you feel are incomplete?

7. What would be your overall opinion of the grant for ArtReach?

8. Is there any other information you would like to add? (Please feel free to use as much space as you need.)

Participant Survey Questions for Ms. Silbert

1. Does the grant properly articulate ArtReach’s mission and vision? In what ways would you suggest revising the Mission and Vision Statement to better highlight ArtReach’s ability to fill the creative learning gap?

16

2. In what ways would you suggest articulating the objectives and scopes of ArtReach so that the program’s scope aids in helping establish future workers with collaborative, critical thinking, and creative skills?

3. With your experience in grant writing, would you say that the needs statement best describes ArtReach’s need for funding as well as the community’s need for ArtReach’s services?

a. How would you best illustrate ArtReach’s importance within the community?

4. In your opinion, are the goals described realistic? What recommendations would you make so that ArtReach’s outcomes best represent measurable and specific outcomes?

5. On a scale of 1 to 5, 1 being the least and 5 being the greatest, please rate the clarity of the implementation and work plan: 1 2 3 4 5

a. What are your recommendations for improvement?

b. What ways would you best articulate ArtReach’s qualifications?

6. Would you say that the “Quantifiable Indicators” realistically coincide with ArtReach's goals and objectives? What improvements would you recommend making so that the Farrell Family Foundation (FFF) can clearly see ArtReach’s potential?

7. Would you say that the monitoring/evaluation plan best showcases a quantifiable and qualitative approach in measuring ArtReach’s outcomes and goals? What recommendations would you make to improve this section?

8. Does this grant make a good appeal in showcasing ArtReach’s long-term goals? Would you say that the “Future Funding” best illustrates ArtReach’s sustainability as a program as well as highlight its stance within the community?

 

17