| Diversidad de las expresiones culturales

Project ID: 2022-9229

Name of applicant:

Corporación Centro Cultural Gabriela Mistral, GAM

Country of applicant:

Chile

Type of applicant:

NGO

Amount requested:

93.950,00USD

Beneficiary country(ies):

Chile

Status:

Non Recommended

Total Score: 27

IFCD Submissions details

Preselection | National Commissions Review

IFCD Preselection form - - 07/27/2022 - 03:03

Submitted by on 27 Jul 2022

1. Name and contact details of officer from the National Commission for UNESCO

Title:

Family name:

SOLIS MUÑOZ

Given name:

RAMON

Position:

FUNCIONARIO UNIDAD ASUNTOS INTERNACIONALES - MINISTERIO DE LAS CULTURAS, LAS ARTES Y EL PATRIMONIO

Address:

AHUMADA 48, PISO 7, SANTIAGO CENTRO.

Postcode:

8320000

Town:

SANTIAGO DE CHILE

E-mail:

ramon.solis@cultura.gob.cl

2. Justification of pre-selection

What are the main reasons for having pre-selected this project proposal, as compared to other proposals received by the National Commission for UNESCO?:

The project is relevant and suitable for the fulfillment of the purposes of the IFCD, insofar as it is consistent with its "General Objective", with 2 of the 4 "Outcomes", and with 3 of the 10 "Expected Results". The Request Form has been filled out correctly. Considering the Project Framework prepared (Objectives, Results, Activities, Budget, Team, and Summary), and the information provided therein, it is estimated that the project is achievable and feasible according to the established deadlines and associated execution modalities. It has an adequate and transparent Financial Management Plan, and the areas related to project Sustainability have been clearly detailed.

3. The applicant institution/organization

What elements demonstrate that the applicant institution/organization is a significant stakeholder in the culture sector (locally / nationally / internationally)?:

The social outbreak of October 18th involved many issues for GAM: programming was suspended, the building closed for 11 days and time was taken to observe and rethink both the programmatic offer and the communication that had been established up to that moment. On October 30th, the building had a symbolic opening with the presence of the Citizen Choirs, as well as town halls and special activities for the social context. All this new offer was covered by the #AlamedaOpen communication campaign, which positioned the GAM as a key meeting place for debate, conversation and reflection around the main axis where people and social demonstrations travel: Alameda Street.

4. Relevance of the pre-selected project proposal

4.1. What are the main current needs and priorities in your country in terms of cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

• Culture as a pillar of sustainable development, safeguarding the cultural rights of generations to come both at the local and national levels. the above assumes. • Free and diverse creation, both individual and collective, socially valued, respecting intellectual property and copyrights. • Promote a strengthened, stable, and sustainable artistic-cultural field that respects the labor rights of cultural workers. • Promote active citizenships with an impact on public action in culture. • A cultural participation of all people, based on the principle of nondiscrimination. • Interculturality and cultural diversity as a source of wealth for society as a whole. • A comprehensive education that considers arts and culture as fundamental components in the development of individuals and the community. • Innovative and diverse processes of cultural, artistic, and heritage mediation for an active citizenry and in full knowledge of their cultural rights.

4.2. How do the objectives of this pre-selected project proposal meet the current needs and priorities of the country in terms of cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

The objectives of the project contribute to the priorities in terms of national cultural policies, in the following aspects: • Promotes collaborative management models at the local level, with an emphasis on municipalities, which contribute to the planning of integrated, participatory and sustainable cities and territories, placing culture as the axis of strategies for local development in its dimensions, both rural and urban. • Promotes the creative economy as a dynamic factor of the territories, their artists, cultivators, creators and local identities, starting from the identification of potential and territorial trajectories and adopting strategies that consider the equitable participation of creators, creators and cultural agents. Of the territory. • Promotes training in the arts, cultures and heritage for the professionalization, recognition, appreciation and maintenance of the vitality of the artistic and cultural field. • Strengthens citizen consultation and participation mechanisms regarding public action in culture, respecting their singularities. • Promotes the strengthening of an informed citizenry involved in public action in culture. • Promotes citizen appropriation of cultural, heritage and memory spaces, through cultural participation in the territory with an emphasis on intercultural dialogue. • Strengthens the development and qualification of specialized infrastructure and the use of non-specialized spaces, to reduce the cultural infrastructure gap in the territories. • Contributes to effective and efficient management and administration of cultural spaces, promoting their sustainability, with emphasis on the development of cultural management skills, networking and associativity.

4.3. To what extent do you expect this pre-selected project proposal to have an impact on the country’s cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

The GAM is a diverse and open meeting place. Today it has 22 thousand m2 in which there are ten rooms for theater, dance, circus, classical and popular music, visual arts, popular art and conferences. There are also five squares and a library, BiblioGAM, specializing in performing and visual arts, with open shelving and study and reading rooms. It also has a recording studio. The building has universal and free access, from Monday to Sunday. BiblioGAM, squares and exhibition halls can be accessed free of charge. Along with its contemporary artistic programming and open spaces, GAM works for the development of audiences with meetings, workshops, talks and special functions that promote the participation of audiences with less access to culture. It is expected that the project will contribute to the strengthening and valorization of the contribution of the cultural work of social organizations to the development of the country and of cultural workers, with a view to reversing the precariousness that afflicts the sector and reactivating its activities, contributing to offset the devastating effects of the pandemic.

5. Other information

Please indicate other contextual information that the IFCD Panel of Experts should take into consideration when evaluating the pre-selected project proposal.:

There is no more information to provide.

6. The pre-selection process at the national level

RAMON SOLIS MUÑOZ

Full name:

RAMON SOLIS MUÑOZ

Organization:

MINISTERIO DE LAS CULTURAS, LAS ARTES Y EL PATRIMONIO

Type of organization/Institution:

Parte

Position:

FUNCIONARIO UNIDAD ASUNTOS INTERNACIONALES

Date:

2022

Full Name of the representative of the National Commission as Signature:

RAMON SOLIS MUÑOZ

IFCD Submissions details

Eligibility | Technical Assessment

IFCD Eligibility form - - 09/29/2022 - 12:20

Submitted by on 29 Sep 2022

Eligibility Status:

Eligible

Technical Examination

Submitted by the deadline:

Yes

Application Form submitted either in English or French:

Yes

Maximum amount requested is US$ 100,000 or below:

Yes

Project implementation period is between 12 and 24 months:

Yes

All sections of the Form are completed:

Yes

Signature of applicant:

Yes

The applicant does not have an ongoing IFCD funded project:

Yes

Falls within the areas of intervention of IFCD:

Yes

IF PARTY OR NGO

Party to the 2005 Convention from developing countries:

Yes

National Commission Review Form:

Yes

Signature of National Commission:

Yes

Official document/ statutes (with English or French translation if necessary):

Yes

IFCD Submissions details

Experts Evaluations

EVALUATION GRID
8 points	The project proposal addresses perfectly all relevant aspect of the criterion under consideration. The answer provides all the information needed and there are no concerns or areas of weakness
6-7 points	The proposal addressed the criterion well, although some improvements could be made. The answer gives clear information on all or nearly all of the evidence needed.
5-4 points	The project proposal broadly addresses the criterion, but there are still some weaknesses. The answer gives some relevant information, but there are several areas where detail is lacking or the information is unclear.
3-2 points	The project proposal does not entirely address the criterion or cannot be judged properly due to missing or incomplete information. The answer does not necessarily address the question asked, or gives very little relevant information.
1 point	The project proposal barely addresses the criterion. There is a clear lack of relevant information that makes it extremely difficult to judge whether the question asked is addressed.
0 points	The project proposal fails to address the criterion or cannot be assessed due to the lack of pertinent information. The answer does not address the question asked, or does not provide relevant information.

Expert 1

Sub-Total Expert 1 : 13

IFCD Expert Evaluation form - L_RODRIGUEZ - 10/05/2022 - 16:38

Submitted by L_RODRIGUEZ on 05 Oct 2022

Brief summary of the project:

"Revival of zero zone in Santiago, Chile" is an initiative proposed by the Gabriela Mistral Cultural Center Corporation, GAM to strengthen artistic networks in two neighborhoods of the country's capital affected by the 2019 social outbreak through participatory and deliberative tools, to stimulate the creative and affective ecosystem in the territory. The institution requests $93,950.00 to expand the participation mechanisms of communities and artistic groups and improve cultural programming and the dissemination of activities generated by the collectives. It is planned to run for two years.

1. RELEVANCE AND APPROPRIATENESS OF THE PROJECT TO THE OBJECTIVES AND AREAS OF INTERVENTION OF THE IFCD

1.1 Please describe how the project objectives and proposed impact/long-term benefits are aligned with at least one of the IFCD’s outcomes and associated expected results.:

The project is aligned with the ER 1.1., ER 1.2., ER 1.3., because it is committed to improving the governance system of the cultural groups and resources of the Zone Zero territory. It is proposed to improve intersectoral cooperation with public and private actors to stop gentrification, promote the movement of people (visitors) and recover public spaces. The formulation of public policies involving the Municipality of Santiago, the Regional Government and the Ministry of Culture, Arts and Heritage in the territory is also proposed to provide a complex response. It is a project that also focuses on and prioritizes the participation of civil society groups.

1.2 How do the objectives of this project proposal meet the current needs and priorities of the country/ region in terms of cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

The project raises priority issues for cultural policies, such as expanding the participation of vulnerable people and groups in formulating programs that involve them. With this process, the GAM Center plans to strengthen the resilience of communities and artistic groups in response to the deterioration of the so-called ground zero as a result of the 2019 demonstrations. It is aligned with the vision of the Ministry of Culture, Arts and Heritage to change the perception of cultural work from its base, to dignify the work of artists and creators and to strengthen cultural democracy.

1.3 To what extent are the project’s objectives specific and measurable?:

To a certain extent, the project's objectives are set out in very general terms, which hinders its planning and measurement, especially when it comes to influencing a programmatic system. It is proposed, for example, to promote participation in the territory's communities to improve the artistic programming of the Cultural Center and its activities. While this is a laudable goal, its approach needs to be more precise.

1.4 To what extent does the project contribute to the promotion of gender equality, the empowerment of youth, South-South and North-South-South cooperation and/or the participation of various groups in the areas of intervention of the IFCD?:

This project focuses on ground zero and its ecosystem and does not plan to incorporate non-Chilean personnel among its team, nor external exchange or collaboration actions. Nor does it have a gender or youth approach in the methodology that is proposed in a very general way.

Score:

2. FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT, AS WELL AS THE RELEVANCE AND EFFECTIVENESS OF ITS MODALITIES OF EXECUTION

2.1 What elements demonstrate the applicant’s organizational capacity (main activities of the institution/organization) and competence (skills and background of staff) to implement the work plan and manage the budget?:

The Gabriela Mistral Center, GAM, is an iconic cultural center in Chile with extensive infrastructure for various disciplines in an area of 22,000 m2. It has more than a decade of experience in high-impact cultural programming. The members of the institutional team have the appropriate skills and experiences. The Center also has a study area that seems suitable for the mapping and formulation process. There is only a reference to local financing well below what is requested from this Fund.

2.2 To what extent do the activities address relevant issues? Please explain how the methodology is appropriate to achieving the objectives?:

In general terms, the methodology lacks a systemic vision, and the relationship between the components is not sufficiently explicit, for example, in the case of several co-design and co-programming processes, or the fact that the Manifesto, for example, is a start and not a result of the process. Various mechanisms are created, such as commissions, resource centers, and artistic laboratories for self-training and networking, but it is not clear how they are articulated with each other and where it points in terms of structural change.

2.3 To what extent is the time frame realistic and coherent with the activities?:

The project will be executed for 24 months, between 4/1/2023 and 3/31/2025, which seems realistic, taking into account the objectives and the diversity of processes that are planned to be activated.

2.4 Have the direct and indirect beneficiaries of the project been clearly identified? To what extent are the outputs/deliverables and main activities relevant to the target beneficiaries and address their needs?:

The direct and indirect beneficiaries have been identified only geographically as neighbors of the Communities of San Borja and Santa Lucía-Parque Forestal. Consequently, no differentiated approaches address the specific needs of the groups, which contrasts with the existence of an area of audience studies in the institution. Likewise, with respect to the beneficiaries of the laboratory, they are identified only as Emerging local artistic collectives and cultural agents.

Score:

3. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY

3.1 Does the budget provide for adequate resources (salaries, fees, equipment, travel, communication, etc.) necessary for success of the project? If the budget has been overestimated or underestimated, please explain how.:

The planned budget is $323,138.00, of which $93,950 is required from UNESCO. Almost 62% of the budget is allocated to salaries and fees, which seems appropriate for a professor of capacity building, networking and programming, but there are repeated categories of expenses, such as that of coordinator of the network of cultural institutions, consisting of $6900. Other costs include activities like the production of events, representing 33% of the total.

3.2 What proportion of the budget is allocated to project activities versus overhead costs? Does the budget seem adequate and overhead costs estimated in compliance with the limit to a maximum of 30% of the total project budget?:

Overhead costs are 0.

3.3 Does the project proposal indicate any additional financial contributions to the project, such as co-funding and/or self- funding?:

Yes, around 71% of the budget is provided, however, there is no reference to the type of contribution or the source.

3.4 What actions have been foreseen to ensure financial accountability (e.g. Involvement of a financial officer)?:

The Directorate of Administration and Finance of the cultural center will be the unit in charge of financial management. No specific information is shared on how this international fund will be managed, taking into account that support of this type does not seem to have been received before.

Score :

4. IMPACT AND EXPECTED RESULTS, INCLUDING POTENTIAL FOR STRUCTURAL CHANGE

4.1 Are the project’s expected outputs and/or deliverables concrete, measurable and realistic? To what extent are they likely to achieve the objectives of the project?:

The project is unclear about the relationship between its various outputs and deliverables. Some outputs, such as the Manifesto, do not understand how it is linked to other participatory processes. In general terms, they would aim to achieve the project's objectives, but their approach should be more concrete and realistic, for example, the program of joint actions for the reactivation, cultural development, and reconstruction of the social and affective network of the zero zone neighborhoods.

4.2 To what extent are the main activities and the budget relevant and appropriate to achieving the intended outputs and/or deliverables?:

The project budget would seem to be overestimated, considering the type of activities and products; for example, concerning printing, $11,500 is allocated in the context of new possibilities, such as not printing physically. As stated, many activities could be integrated more organically and reduce costs, such as laboratories and activity planning.

4.3 To what extent is it expected that this project will have an impact/long-term benefits on the country/region’s cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

In a certain way, improving the relationship with the communities of an iconic cultural center and expanding the devices for citizen participation in the programming, especially of the host communities of these cultural infrastructures, should contribute to implementing cultural policies.

4.4 To what extent does the project demonstrate potential for structural change (for example: changes in the policy environment; far-reaching changes in public and professional organizational structures; and changes in the way government and regulatory authorities do business)?:

To a very limited extent, the project proposes a structural change in a concrete way. It is not aimed at changing the cultural policies of peer centers, nor does it establish collaboration with other cultural institutions outside the city, for example. Even though both the Metropolitan Regional Government and the Ministry of Culture, Arts and Heritage are not clear about how this project will contribute to structural change in cultural policies, being, for example, the pilot of an existing program or emergent.

Score:

5. SUSTAINABILITY

5.1 To what extent are contractors and partners involved in the implementation of the project’s activities? Has the role of each contractor and/or partner been clearly described?:

NGOs, such as the Museum of Visual Arts, and public institutions, such as the National Museum of Fine Arts, and the Museum of Contemporary Art, are part of the project's counterparts. However, it is unclear how those institutions participate in specific activities because GAM staff are the only ones involved.

5.2 How does the project relate to and/or complement the work that is already being carried out in the country/region in terms of cultural policies and/or industries?:

The Municipality of Santiago, the Metropolitan Regional Government and the Ministry of Culture, Arts and Heritage, are mentioned as part of the project stakeholders. However, no specific tasks are allocated to them, and it is unclear how this project would affect a structural change at the level of the institutional ecosystem beyond the improvement of GAM programming.

5.3 What measures/steps are proposed to ensure that the project’s impact/long-term benefits can be achieved?:

With the implementation, the creation of a working method based on collaborative work, a transversal approach and a principle of optimization of resources and cooperation is expected. However, it is unclear what the binding mechanisms will be at the technical, budgetary and political levels to ensure ownership of the post-project approach. This approach seems more declarative than programmatic, as it does not define how it will be achieved.

5.4 What measures/steps are proposed to follow up with the beneficiaries of the project after its completion?:

The Cultural Studies area at the Gabriela Mistral Cultural Center plans to develop the following actions: monitoring of participation through registration tables, evaluation case studies with the beneficiaries and with the communities, art groups and agents cultural, although it does not define a mechanism or temporality for the application of these ideas.

Score:

Overall evaluation:

This project values culture as a tool for resilience. It aims to optimize the uses of cultural facilities as a motor of the territories' transformation, which is a crucial issue for the 2005 Convention and the IFDC. Expanding opportunities for the participation of people and communities in the formulation, implementation and evaluation of cultural programs aimed at them must be a priority, and this project endorses it. However, as a proposal, the systemic approach and the governance of participatory processes and strategic alliances could be better worked. It should contribute to achieving situated incidences adapted to realities and attending to those who most need it in the territories, considering their general impact approach.

Expert 2

Sub-Total Expert 2 : 14

IFCD Expert Evaluation form - - 10/07/2022 - 11:52

Submitted by on 07 Oct 2022

Brief summary of the project:

The applicant Corporación Centro Cultural Gabriela Mistral, GAM proposes a project with a key objective to reactivate the creative and cultural ecosystem of the “zero zone” (location of the October 2019 social outburst/revolt ) in Santiago, Chile by transforming it into a vivid neighbourhood and increase cultural offers that match communities’ expectations and needs. The project’s requested budget is 93 950 USD and there are 229 188 USD funded from other sources.

1. RELEVANCE AND APPROPRIATENESS OF THE PROJECT TO THE OBJECTIVES AND AREAS OF INTERVENTION OF THE IFCD

1.1 Please describe how the project objectives and proposed impact/long-term benefits are aligned with at least one of the IFCD’s outcomes and associated expected results.:

The project corresponds with several IFCD’s areas of intervention, mainly related to the democratization of arts and widening access, as well as with cross-sectoral cooperation in policy-making. The project intends to consolidate a strategic alliance with public and private stakeholders and to increase the role of civil society in cultural policy-making.

1.2 How do the objectives of this project proposal meet the current needs and priorities of the country/ region in terms of cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

The project’s four objectives emphasize on strengthening the networking with arts organisations in the neighborhoods of San Borja and Parque Forestal, promoting and strengthening participatory policy-making, and contributing to strengthening and empowering artistic organisations and collectives. All these objectives contribute to the current needs and priorities of cultural policy of the country and the city. The current trends in cultural industries development and the needs in this direction are less covered by the project.

1.3 To what extent are the project’s objectives specific and measurable?:

The project objectives are actual, specific and needed, but they lack quantitative criteria and are formulated rather broadly For example, the project aims to strengthening participation mechanisms of the territory's communities, or to contribute to strengthening and empowerment of the agents and artistic collectives in the zero zone neighborhoods.

There is no specific reference to gender equality, involvement and empowerment of youth and South-South or North-South-South cooperation, The project is focused mainly on specific neighbourhoods in Santiago.

Score:

2. FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT, AS WELL AS THE RELEVANCE AND EFFECTIVENESS OF ITS MODALITIES OF EXECUTION

The applicant is Gabriela Mistral Center, GAM - a contemporary cultural center having diverse, inclusive and open programming with the mission to promote people’s access to culture. The activities of the Center match the scope and activities planned in the project. The team, consisting of eight people, is diverse, with capacities in many areas, for example: audiovisual production, sociology, journalism, architecture, history etc. The team members have skills, competence and background in these areas. It is not specified in the project framework what is the professional affiliation of these team members and what will be their specific collaboration and roles in this project.

2.2 To what extent do the activities address relevant issues? Please explain how the methodology is appropriate to achieving the objectives?:

The project methodology is around four strategic directions that cover 24 months period. The key focus is to reactivate the arts organisations in the neighborhood and improve cultural participation by offering diverse and open programming of the cultural center by considering the needs and interests of the community. The overall framework is well formulated, although it is not sufficiently specified in what way the diverse activities are related to one another so that the stated objectives and strategic directions will be met. For example, there is a plan to create a resource center, three months residency, a day of feedback with communities of San Borja and Santa Lucía-Parque Forestal neighborhoods, organizing hearing days with these communities and so on. It is not sufficiently specified what is the flow and co-relation between these events and how the results from one activity will influence the next one. The overall intent for involving communities by a day of feedback, and creative hearing days for diagnosis, co-design and co-programming of GAM’s artistic activities is very positive.

2.3 To what extent is the time frame realistic and coherent with the activities?:

The project’s timeline is set up for 2 years (1/4/2023 to 31/3/2025) and is realistic and coherent with the planned activities.

The direct and indirect beneficiaries are identified, but very broadly without the necessary qualitative and quantitative indicators, for example direct beneficiaries are the communities at San Borja and Santa Lucía-Parque Forestal neighborhoods, the indirect participants, are the local communities, local cultural entities, local government, cultural local and national entities. There is no initial need analysis performed among targeted beneficiaries to prove the project’s viability and rationale.

Score:

3. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY

The requested amount is 93 950 USD and the budget is elaborated to correspond to planned activities. Some of the budget items are not sufficiently clarified, for example the production and technical service for programming and cultural milestones designed by the network of cultural institutions (28 800 USD). There are two budget lines for the cultural institutions network coordinator – each one at the amount of 6 900 USD. The budget costs for editing, design and printing of the results are overestimated (11 500 USD), and there is no plan for digital presentation. At the same time, budget costs for the research, elaboration of the Manifesto, methods and tools for community engagement are underestimated.

There are zero overheads, which correspond to compliance with the limit of a maximum of 30% of the total project budget.

3.3 Does the project proposal indicate any additional financial contributions to the project, such as co-funding and/or self- funding?:

The project has a strong additional financial contribution of 229 188 USD – mainly staff salaries of the GMC Center, as well as offering rooms for different activities. On one hand it is a strength, on another hand, the additional contribution is not towards creative programming and collaborative activities.

3.4 What actions have been foreseen to ensure financial accountability (e.g. Involvement of a financial officer)?:

The project envisages that the funds will be controlled by the Director of Administration and Finance of the Center. There is no external auditing mentioned in the project.

Score :

4. IMPACT AND EXPECTED RESULTS, INCLUDING POTENTIAL FOR STRUCTURAL CHANGE

4.1 Are the project’s expected outputs and/or deliverables concrete, measurable and realistic? To what extent are they likely to achieve the objectives of the project?:

There are several outputs of the project, although some of them are mixed up with the planned activities, for example: the coordination table, and activities co-designed and co-programmed with communities. It is not specified sufficiently in what way the Manifesto of the neighborhood’s cultural entities will be elaborated and disseminated and what is its role for achieving the project’s objectives. It is not sufficiently clarified what is the essence and indicators for the planned artistic collaborative lab for self-formation and networking, and the four residences, as well as shows/exhibitions of residency projects.

4.2 To what extent are the main activities and the budget relevant and appropriate to achieving the intended outputs and/or deliverables?:

The planned budget items and planned activities match in general, although there are some discrepancies outlined in 3.1. There is little attention paid in the budget to the creation of a resource center for teaching, mediation and project management.

4.3 To what extent is it expected that this project will have an impact/long-term benefits on the country/region’s cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

The project has a good potential to impact the local cultural policy of the city of Santiago by revitalizing of these two neighborhoods, enriching the activities and offers of the Center and more inclusive cultural policies. The impact on cultural industries is not sufficiently covered in the project.

The impact of the project on structural change and its potential to influence the policy environment is less elaborated in the project. It is not sufficiently specified in what way the undertaken activities and outcomes will change the way government and regulatory authorities on the national or local level function.

Score:

5. SUSTAINABILITY

5.1 To what extent are contractors and partners involved in the implementation of the project’s activities? Has the role of each contractor and/or partner been clearly described?:

The project is based on a partnership between government structures and cultural organisations, which is a strength, There are several partners - prominent cultural organisations - Visual Arts Museum, National Museum of Fine Arts, Contemporary Art Museum, as well as the Municipality of Santiago, Metropolitan Regional Government and the Ministry of Culture, Arts and Heritage. The weakness is that their specific roles and responsibilities in the project’s implementation, and in delivering diverse activities and outcomes, are not clarified.

5.2 How does the project relate to and/or complement the work that is already being carried out in the country/region in terms of cultural policies and/or industries?:

The project contributes well to the overall trend of increasing cultural democracy in the cultural public policy-making in the country. It corresponds well to the work already being done by the municipality of Santiago, the Ministry of Culture, Arts and Heritage, and the GAM Center as well. The project mentions also some co-relations with the 2030 sustainable development objectives, which is a strength.

5.3 What measures/steps are proposed to ensure that the project’s impact/long-term benefits can be achieved?:

The project plans to establish collaborative alliances with local cultural entities and continue networking, optimizing resources and joint actions for solving social issues in these neighborhoods. There is an expectation that the implementation of mechanisms for cultural participation and research on the needs of communities will allow the Cultural Center to put in place attractive programming and increase cultural demand on the territory in a long term.

5.4 What measures/steps are proposed to follow up with the beneficiaries of the project after its completion?:

The project envisages some general ideas to follow up with the beneficiaries, for example, the incorporation of audience participation as an essential element in the strategy of the Cultural Center. Also, there are three stages of follow-up with beneficiaries: Recording process assessment, Impact and Commitment assessment, but the project does not provide sufficient information on how these will be realized.

Score:

Overall evaluation:

The project corresponds well to IFCD’s areas of intervention, mainly related to the democratization of culture and widening access. On the other hand, there is no reference to specific groups, e.g. youth, women, or vulnerable groups. The project’s methodology has some good intentions of involving communities in cultural policy-making, although the planned events are diverse and without sufficient coherence. The project has strong partners, although their role is not sufficiently clarified in the project’s implementation. The direct and indirect beneficiaries are identified, but they lack specific qualitative criteria and elaborated profiles. There is a huge portion of external financing, mainly in a form of salaries and providing spaces in the Cultural Center. Some budget items are not sufficiently specified and clear. The project has a potential for long-term sustainability, although there are no specific references to how key deliverables will continue their life after the project is completed.

IFCD Submissions details

Recommandation review

IFCD Recommendation form - - 12/21/2022 - 15:44

Submitted by on 21 Dec 2022

Recommendation Status:

Non recommended

Recommended Funding:

0.00

Evaluation summary:

While this project scored reasonably well, the experts considered it to have one or more shortcomings, as described in the evaluations, that resulted in a score of less than 30. In accordance with paragraph 17 of the Guidelines on the Use of the Resources of the International Fund for Cultural Diversity, this project is not able to be recommended for funding.