2024 Grant Cycle

The grant program’s purpose is to support the creation of new, live performance projects that will be experienced by communities throughout what is now known as the United States, including its territories and Indigenous tribal nations within.

We welcome dance, theater, and music projects, as well as multi-disciplinary and experimental projects that may be difficult to categorize but are clearly intended to result in new, live performance work. Please note, however, that requests for any of the following are outside of the scope of what MAP funds can support, and will render an application ineligible:

– The creation of recorded albums, films, visual art, or digital art rather than live performance work

– Producing festivals, showcases, competitions, performance platforms, series, or marketing events

– Work that will be experienced primarily by audiences outside of what is now known as the United States, including its territories and Indigenous tribal nations within

– Re-working/re-envisioning a performance that already premiered, including “classics,” repertory, or any past works (whether by the project’s team or other artists)

– A premiere before September 2024, which is the earliest that funds could become available to grantees who complete their paperwork

– Touring after the project’s premiere

– Fulfilling academic requirements

– Teaching youth or adults how to make art

– Art therapy

– General operating

MAP staff read every submitted application to confirm eligibility, and proposals that do not clearly meet the above criteria and/or have insufficient information will be deemed ineligible.

We encourage applications from artists whose performance-making is intended to be–or is coded by the dominant culture as–radical, bold, experimental, and risky in its design, execution, and community resonance. MAP might not be the best fit for you if your work would be considered to include conventional and/or commercial dance, music, or theater practices in its form, content, and/or creation process. Reviewers will assess projects on how they demonstrate potential to exemplify and/or expand upon MAP’s mission to invest in performing artists and their work as the critical foundation of imagining and co-creating a more equitable and vibrant society. Reviewers search for evidence of this potential in how applicants speak to:

– Their experimentation with performance forms and content that aims to advance conversations, perceptions, and/or policies.

– Their effort toward creating an artistic process that treats all participants with care and respect, especially in relation to existing systems of oppression.

Following the review process, applicants selected for an award must adhere to the following criteria:

– The artists will be responsible for choosing a US-based grant custodian. The grant custodian can be an individual with an SSN or ITIN, or an entity with one of these incorporation structures: 501(c)(3), LLC, or S-Corps.

– Applicants intend to spend the grant down from September 2024 to August 2026 (subject to extension on a case-by-case basis)

Q + A

I am a recent grantee. Am I eligible to apply again?
Yes; being a past grantee does not prevent you from applying for MAP’s 2024 grant cycle.

Can I apply with multiple projects?
Yes; artists are not limited to applying with a single project. If you are interested in seeking funding for multiple projects, please submit a separate application for each project.

I applied in a previous MAP grant cycle with a certain project. Am I allowed to apply this year with that same project?
Yes; provided it meets all eligibility requirements, MAP does not prohibit artists from applying with the same project as previous years.

Does MAP fund adaptations?
MAP’s funding focuses on the creation of new performance work. Re-working/re-envisioning a performance that already premiered–including “classics,” repertory, or any past works (whether by the project’s team or other artists)–would be considered ineligible.
Projects may be “inspired by” or reference classical literature or existing works in the global performance canon, but may not seek to reproduce existing content. For applicants using existing plots, characters, music, etc., their proposal must contain sufficient information about the newness of the work. For an example, see the below question Can I see some examples of proposals that are and are not eligible?

Is it an issue if my project is a commission or co-commission?
No; provided your project meets all other eligibility criteria, MAP does not prohibit projects that are commissions or co-commissions from receiving funding.

I’m a representative of a producing/presenting organization. Can we apply on behalf of an artist we’re working with?
Yes; anyone may apply on behalf of an eligible project. The person(s) who create the application may be an individual artist, ensemble representative, producer, manager, agent, or presenter/presenting representative. In the event of a grant, it is the core artist(s) who MAP asks to choose a “grant custodian” and collaborate with the grant custodian regarding how and when the funds will be distributed. The grant custodian, who receives the funds on behalf of the project, can be an individual with an SSN or ITIN, or an entity with one of these incorporation structures: 501(c)(3), LLC, or S-Corps.

Does MAP have requirements around funding a certain career stage?
No; the funds are available to artists at every career stage and are explicitly present- and future-focused. The grant program is not set up to reward past work or to acknowledge lifetime achievements, but rather to invest in the potential of current ideas, processes, collaborations, and organizing efforts.

In the event of a grant, how long do I have to premiere the project?
MAP does not require projects to premiere by any specific date. Upon receipt of the funds, grantees are asked to spend down the grant towards the development of the project between September 2024 to August 2026. Exceptions to that timeline are possible on a case-by-case basis.

Where can I find examples of projects MAP has funded previously?
See a list of previously funded projects under the menu option “Past Grantees” under “Grants.”

Can my collaborators and I fill out this application together?
MAP has enabled collaborative submissions on Submittable, in which multiple people can work on a submission at the same time. For information about how this process works, please refer to Submittable’s website. Please note that all collaborators on an application will be notified in the event of a grant.

I think my project is eligible. Should I apply to MAP?
The default advice for artists and arts workers tends to be: apply to everything all the time, be everywhere at once, know everyone, do everything, and then also do self-care to handle the overwhelm and exhaustion. While MAP’s team tries to make our application as easeful as possible, applying still takes time and effort!

When thinking about applying to MAP, consider first whether your project is eligible. If you’re on the fence about this and would have to squeeze your project through our eligibility criteria, applying with that project may not be the best use of your time. For example, if your project is partially film and partially live performance, that project will be less competitive than a project that is entirely live; if your project adapts an existing story, that project will be less competitive than a project with a new story; and so on.

From there, consider your confidence in addressing how your project exemplifies and/or expands upon MAP’s mission to invest in performing artists and their work as the critical foundation of imagining and co-creating a more equitable and vibrant society. Again, if it would be a stretch for you to clearly articulate to reviewers how your project’s process, content, and form are a good fit for MAP, you may have better luck with another funding source.

If you are certain that MAP is a good fit for your project, we gently encourage you to scale your hopes and expectations of receiving the money to the odds. While we actively fundraise to support as many artists as possible, MAP is unable to fund every proposed project. In 2022, less than 6% of applicants received funding. It’s important to remember that the caliber of your work has nothing to do with the odds – there are more incredible artists making incredible projects than MAP alone can support this cycle.

If you’re interested in learning more about the decision-making process first-hand, you can choose to express interest in being a reviewer this year rather than apply for a grant! 98% of 2022 reviewers who responded to our post-review survey said they would “absolutely recommend participating in MAP’s grant review to other colleagues.” One reviewer said MAP’s process was “The strongest experience I’ve had so far and [I am] looking forward to sharing the experience with other grant makers/reviewers to model a similar approach.”

Can I see some examples of proposals that are and are not eligible?
While MAP staff consider each project’s eligibility on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the nuance of each proposal, we have identified frequent themes regarding eligibility concerns.

Examples for whether a project is considered “new.”

1. An adaptation of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, set in modern times and with updated songs and text, but with largely the same plot and characters.

→ Likely ineligible, as this project would be a re-working/re-envisioning a performance that already premiered.

2. The first production of a new play that has had two public developmental readings.

→ Likely eligible, as MAP generally does not consider readings or workshops to be premieres (unless the project team had advertised them as such).

3. An opera that premiered in Senegal in 2022 but has not yet had a performance in the United States.

→ Likely ineligible, as MAP considers international premieres as premieres, and this project initially premiered before September 2024, which is the earliest that funds could become available to grantees who complete their paperwork.

4. A new dance piece inspired by a short story originally published in 1923 but never adapted before for the stage.

→ While likely eligible, please note that adaptations may be less competitive in our selection process. We encourage those applying with adaptations to focus any application materials on the new or original aspects that the artists are bringing to the story.

Examples for whether a project is considered live performance. MAP does not fund recorded albums, films, visual art, or digital art.

1. A musician who is seeking funding for a new, live evening-length piece that they also intend to record in a studio at a later date.

→ Likely eligible, as while the piece may eventually end up as a recorded album, the musician’s main goal is for a live performance, and they will not use the grant funds for the recording/production of the album.

2. A sculpture exhibit by an artist who primarily works in performance.

→ Likely ineligible, as this project would be considered visual art.

3. A play devised by immunocompromised artists that will be performed for an audience over an online platform.

→ Likely eligible, as the piece will include the artists performing in real time. If the artists were going to pre-record their performance, edit it, and then put it on a digital platform, that would likely be ineligible.

4. A film that will be presented in theaters with live musicians and singers providing the score.

→ While possibly eligible, this project may not be the best fit for MAP, as it does not focus primarily on live performance.

Examples for whether a project is considered a festival, showcase, competition, performance platform, series, or marketing event, which MAP does not fund.

1. A week-long event featuring the dance works of ten different artists who created new works around the topic of voting justice. While the artists were in conversation with the producer while developing their pieces, they did not collaborate with each other.

→ Likely ineligible, as this project would be considered a performance platform for artists to show separate pieces.

2. A play that will be presented as part of a local fringe festival.

→ Likely eligible, as long as the proposal is clear that funds will be used for this play and not the entire festival.

3. An artist creating four unique music compositions. Each piece will premiere individually across the span of a year.

→ Likely ineligible, as this project would be considered a series rather than a single new, live performance piece.

Examples for whether a project is considered fulfilling academic requirements and/or teaching youth or adults how to make art, which MAP does not fund.

1. Two artists, one of whom is also a PhD candidate, working on a new, live jazz piece unrelated to the candidate’s curriculum or degree requirements.

→ Likely eligible, as the candidate is not using the grant to fulfill their academic requirements.

2. A classical musician who is going to teach members of their community how to play the piano so they can all co-create a final piece.

→ Likely ineligible, as this falls under the category of teaching youth or adults how to make art, even if outside of curricular requirements.

3. A multidisciplinary piece created by an adult working artist and a small group of young people ages 10 to 16. The artist considers the young people to be equal collaborators in the piece, and none of the young people are participating in the piece to fulfill academic requirements.

→ Likely eligible, as MAP welcomes collaborations between people of all ages.

Examples for whether a project is considered touring, which MAP does not fund.

1. A new musical that the artists plan to premiere in Tucson, then present in venues across Arizona.

→ Likely ineligible, as this is a standard structure of touring. If the artists make it clear in their proposal that they will not be using MAP funds for anything beyond the premiere, this could potentially be eligible.

Examples for whether a project is considered art therapy, which MAP does not fund.

1. A group of artists led through a healing process by a facilitator. Throughout the process, they may or may not generate a performance together as one outcome of the work.

→ Likely ineligible, as the focus is largely on the artists’ own internal journeys, and there is no clear plan from the beginning for a specific new, live performance.

2. A live performance installation that will have designated spaces for audience members to rest as needed.

→ Likely eligible, as while the project uses rest as a theme/practice, the focus is largely on the live performance aspect.

Examples for whether a project is considered general operating, which MAP does not fund.

1. A proposal that intends to support a cohort of artists in a community, providing them with resources to work on their practices.

→ Likely ineligible, as there is no focus on a specific new, live performance that the artists will create together.

2. A presenting organization’s season of five new works.

→ Likely ineligible, as the funding would be going to support the organization rather than one of the new works.

Additional Examples

1. A proposal with a project description that only includes a summary of the plot of the story the artists want to tell.

→ Likely ineligible, as the project description did not include sufficient information about whether the project is a live performance.

2. A play that will be developed in Canada and premiered in the United States.

→ While possibly eligible, this project may not be the best fit for MAP, as part of our mission is to invest in the performing arts ecology of what is now known as the United States, including its territories and Indigenous tribal nations within.

October 23, 2023
Grant application opens
Reviewer interest form opens

December 19, 2023 at 5:00 p.m. ET
Deadline to apply for funding or to be a reviewer in MAP’s 2024 grant cycle
MAP does not accept late proposals. To avoid encountering any technical difficulties that prevent you from completing your application, we highly recommend that you submit your application by December 14.

January 5, 2024
Applicant experience survey closes

March 2024
Results are sent out to all who expressed interest in being a reviewer

March – July 2024
Selection process takes place

August 2024
Grant cycle results emailed to all applicants
Contracts and payout processes begin for new grantees

September 2024
Funds available to grantees

Q + A

In the event of a grant, how long do I have to premiere the project?
MAP does not require projects to premiere by any specific date. Upon receipt of the funds, grantees are asked to spend down the grant towards the development of the project between September 2024 to August 2026. Exceptions to that timeline are possible on a case-by-case basis.

In the event of a grant, are there restrictions on how I can use the project funding ($25,000)?
Project funds are relatively flexible and may be used for creation, dependent care, personnel, practice, production, rehearsal, research, rest, residency, travel, and workshop costs.

I cannot find my grant cycle result. Where would it be?
Primary contacts should receive an email notification through Submittable by August. These emails occasionally get filtered into spam, but they are also available on Submittable under “messages.” If you still cannot find this result, reach out to MAP staff.

Step 1

MAP staff read every submitted application to confirm eligibility. Proposals that do not clearly meet MAP’s eligibility criteria and/or have insufficient information will be deemed ineligible.

Step 2

MAP will hire 60+ representatives of the artistic community (“reviewers”). Working independently, reviewers will assess projects on how they demonstrate potential to exemplify and/or expand upon MAP’s mission. Reviewers search for evidence of this potential in how applicants speak to:

– Their experimentation with performance forms and content that aims to advance conversations, perceptions, and/or policies.

– Their effort toward creating an artistic process that treats all participants with care and respect, especially in relation to existing systems of oppression.

Projects can demonstrate potential in a multitude of ways. Rather than impose parameters on what the artistic work must be like–which can in no way serve as an appropriate requirement for every project, nor encourage the variety of exploration that MAP champions–we invite reviewers to consider each applicant’s own standards, definitions, and goals for how they see their artistic work as the critical foundation of imagining and co-creating a more equitable and vibrant society.

Taking in that breadth across the applicant pool, reviewers draw upon their own knowledge, expertise, and commitment to MAP’s values to complete the following questions. Reviewers’ votes account for the application as a whole; no single component should disproportionately influence voting. Here are the questions that reviewers respond to for each application:

1) Have you experienced the work of any artists listed on this application?

– I haven’t experienced any of their work.

– I’ve experienced some of their work.

– I’ve experienced most or all of their work.

2) Do you know any of the artists listed on the application?

– I didn’t know any of the artists prior to this proposal.

– I know of one or more artists, but don’t have a relationship with them.

– I’ve worked with one or more of the artists.

– I have a close personal and/or professional relationship with one or more artists.

Selections to question #1 and 2 have no bearing on whether or not an applicant moves forward. The data helps us assess the degree of familiarity reviewers have with the applicant pool. As reviewers cast votes, we ask them to notice if they tend to recommend that “familiar artists” move forward more often than unfamiliar artists. It could be an indicator of unconscious bias.

3) Do you need to declare a conflict of interest?

– Yes

– No

A reviewer is considered to have a “conflict of interest” if they have a relationship with the artistic team as:

– An employee;

– A fundraiser or public relations person;

– An independent contractor who has received fees or payments in the past 12 months;

– Has had and/or is having a relationship of an intimate nature with the grant applicant;

– Will benefit directly or indirectly from the grant applicant’s funding from MAP Fund

In the event of conflict of interest with an applicant, the reviewer will not participate in any aspect of the decision-making process in connection with any matter that involves the applicant directly or indirectly. The proposal will be assigned to another reviewer, and not adversely affected by the declaration of a conflict of interest.

4) Based on my understanding of the proposal, this project’s intentions:

– exemplify and/or expand upon MAP’s funding focus

– satisfy MAP’s funding focus

– fall outside of MAP’s funding focus

– were not clear enough for me to make an assessment

5) Please select one of the following:

– I vote FOR this proposal to move forward to random selection.

– I’m unsure but inclined to vote FOR.

– I’m unsure but inclined to vote AGAINST.

– I vote AGAINST this proposal moving forward to random selection.

Step 3

2024 applicants with the highest degree of consensus will move into this step. An Excel function will randomly draw projects. We implemented random selection because our experience shows that traditional grant review panels tend to favor more resourced artists. This selection method eliminates subjective arbitration, risk aversion, and groupthink that can surface in human decision-making processes.

Step 4

MAP’s Board of Directors approves the selected projects.

Upon notification of the grant, artists will be asked to:

– Identify and provide contact information for a grant custodian with a Social Security Number (SSN), Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), or 501(c)(3), LLC, or S-Corp organization that will receive and distribute the funds;

– Share financial projections for the project, such as how they plan on using the funds;

– Approve or generate materials for a press release, including high-resolution images to represent the project;

– Complete a brief final report by September 30, 2026 (a budget as well as a written narrative or meeting with the grant team). The project does not need to have premiered by this date, but we expect grantees to have spent the funds. Extensions are possible on a case-by-case basis.

Grant custodians will be asked to:

– Ensure that artists are aware of any administrative fees (for example, MAP allows fiscal sponsors to retain no more than 10% of the funds), and how and when funds will be distributed;

– Execute digital contracts and choose the payment method (electronic transfer or physical check).

Q + A

I’m a core artist on the project. In the event of a grant, can I also be the grant custodian?
Yes, provided you have a Social Security Number (SSN), Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), or 501(c)(3), LLC, or S-Corp organization that will receive and distribute the funds.

Is MAP providing feedback on submitted applications?
Reviewers are not required to include feedback as part of their process. While some reviewers utilize an optional comment field, we do not offer feedback to applicants because we would not be able to consistently do so. Reviewer comments inform how we design future programs and shape our applicant support materials, such as this website.

Can I see comments from past reviewers?
All of the following quotes were taken directly from comments that reviewers left on previous proposals. Some have been edited for clarity and/or privacy.

“This project is still in the very broad concept phase. I sense the artist could benefit from more development of concept, form, audience, and impact goals.”
“The proposal was not clear enough about what the project would detail in order to determine whether it fits into MAP’s funding focus.”
“Many interesting possibilities here but the project seems a bit too embryonic at this stage, could be a strong re-submission.”
MAP encourages applications from projects in all stages of development, with the suggestion that potential applicants should reflect on whether they feel adequately prepared to discuss their work or idea in detail. If an applicant speaks about their project in only general or broad terms, it may be difficult for reviewers to understand their intentions. If you do not feel like you are able to articulate your plans for the project in specific terms, applying for a future grant opportunity may be the best course of action for you.

This isn’t to say that applicants must have all logistics fully sorted out! For example, if you’re a composer who is still looking for a director and scenic designer for your opera, consider addressing how you will assemble your team. Are you looking for collaborators with a certain skill set and/or a certain identity or experience? Do you have existing connections to any potential collaborators? If not, how might you build those relationships?

“It would be helpful to learn more about how this team will handle the heavy subject matter in development, rehearsals, and performance.”
Some applicants write about their ideas to tackle issues such as police brutality, sexual assault, or other forms of trauma without directly addressing how they are considering the impact that these issues might have on their collaborators during the creation and/or performance of the project. As reviewers are asked to consider each proposal’s “effort toward creating an artistic process that treats all participants with care and respect, especially in relation to existing systems of oppression,” applicants who do not address their strategy or ethos around handling such material may leave reviewers with unanswered questions.

“This artist does offer a rough technical and conceptual approach, but does not describe what this performance will look like, its duration, the people who will perform in it, etc.”
While trying to describe the background or theory surrounding their practice, some applicants may forget to speak to how audiences might engage with their project. Whether it’s a 90-minute blackbox play with puppets or a durational jazz installation, reviewers tend to appreciate when applicants provide a sense of what being an audience member for the piece might feel like.

“I’m curious how devising participants/interviewees are compensated or credited in the building of the work.”
“What ownership might the interview subjects have over the final project? How might THEY benefit from this work?”
For applicants who work in community-based or documentary-based forms, and/or in collaboration with people who are not working artists, we encourage addressing an ethos around those dynamics. MAP understands that artists and communities support each other in a myriad of ways – for some projects, this may look like monetary compensation, while for others, potlucks, carpools, or other forms of mutual aid serve that purpose. However you choose to work with your/a community, writing directly about your process may help reviewers understand your intentions better.

“As a person who has often had their culture appropriated, based on what the artist shared about their practice and background, I found the language and approach to this performance inappropriate. Though I love seeing other artists engage my culture’s practices in their work, I find the lack of cultural context in this proposal both unprofessional and alarming.”
For applicants engaging in practices outside of their own heritage/culture, it’s helpful to discuss how they’re navigating such dynamics. Without proper context, reviewers might flag these proposals as engaging in cultural appropriation or other harmful practices.

“It seems the applicant would use the grant mostly to record/produce an album, as opposed to a live performance.”
“This appears to be a series of community events without a performance focus.”
“This application clearly states this is the third iteration of a series and I am curious how that lands in terms of the eligibility factor regarding work that is a restaging – it feels like a remount of sorts.”
“My hesitation around this project related to its extremely close adaptation of a classic play – this proximity of this text to the original seemed to flirt with eligibility around restaging classical works.”
While MAP staff screen clearly ineligible applications from the pool, applications that border the eligibility criteria are sometimes allowed to pass to the review stage. If reviewers sense that the projects are not the best fit for MAP’s criteria, they are instructed to vote accordingly.

Please read the entire “Eligibility + Alignment” tab before beginning your application. More information and tips on crafting your application are also available below.

Q + A

How do I know my application was received?
After clicking “Submit,” the primary contact will receive a confirmation email indicating that MAP successfully received the application. Check your promotions or spam folders if you don’t see it in your primary mailbox. A confirmation record is also available in Submittable’s “Activity & Messages” tab.

Can I submit an application in a language other than English?
At this time, MAP is only able to accept written proposal materials in English. Work samples in languages other than English do not need to be translated, but applicants may choose to add subtitles to a video work sample, or a translation in the work sample context field.

PROJECT INFORMATION

I’m ready to draft my project description. Where do I start?
Start by addressing the what, where, why, and how of your project. You may also find these specific prompts helpful:

– What exactly is the project, and how will it take form? If multi-faceted, which components meet the eligibility criteria of “new, live performance?”

– How does the project resonate with MAP’s mission to invest in performing artists and their work as the critical foundation of imagining and co-creating a more equitable and vibrant society?

– What or who are your influences for the project?

– How long might the project take to create and share with the public?

– How might you select collaborators for this project?

– What are your methods of collaboration and creation?

– What inspires you to focus on this particular project at this time?

Is MAP staff providing feedback on project description drafts?
No, MAP staff will not be providing feedback on project description drafts this year. We are piloting a two-page worksheet for applicants to seek feedback from their friends and collaborators.

What if my project description ends up being much longer than the suggested word count?
MAP does not impose word count limits on the project description field. With that said, please note that reviewers are asked to spend approximately 20 minutes on each application. For those far over the suggested word count, reviewers will read as much of the proposal as they reasonably can in the allotted time, accounting for reviewing the work sample and artist bios as well.

ARTISTS

Which artists should go in which section?
There is a distinction between “core artists” and artistic, administrative, and producing collaborators below to help reviewers understand who is generating the work. Additionally, it helps MAP staff understand who we would be in communication with in the event of a grant. Core artists should:

1. Have responsibility for overall project decisions, including but not limited to artistic, financial, personnel, and intellectual property decisions.

2. Be accountable for how and when funds are spent in the event of a grant.

Artists who do not hold these responsibilities should be listed in Part B, “Additional Collaborators.”

There are up to three core artist spots available in the application. Core artists can either be individuals or companies/ensembles (each company/ensemble can count for one spot). We assume that each core artist entry holds a similar level of leadership or decision-making authority.

– Example A: Core Artist #1 is a playwright. Core Artist #2 is a director. They both hold equal decision-making power.

– Example B: Core Artist #1 is an ensemble of four artists who are collectively devising the script and performing the project. Core Artist #2 is an individual artist who is composing all music and lyrics for the project. They all hold equal decision-making power.

How do I list my commissioner/producer?
While we understand many play crucial roles in a project’s development, we ask that you do not list producers or commissioners as core artists. Please list them in Part B, “Additional Collaborators.”

The role I hold in this project is not in the list of options. What should I select?
Please select the option that most closely describes your role. If you wish to elaborate further, use the bio or project description fields.

What information should I include in my bio?
When introducing reviewers to who you are, you may want to include some context about the proposed project’s relationship with practices, themes, questions, and/or interests that you’ve been investigating during your artistic career. You are not required to generate something solely for the purposes of applying.

WORK SAMPLE

How many work samples can I include in my application?
Please only submit ONE work sample.

How should I select a work sample?
Whether you choose in-process documentation or past work, the goal is to use the sample to make a connection to the proposed project. For example, if an artist proposes to choreograph a dance, it’s best for them to submit a sample of their choreographic work.

If you are experimenting with new forms and do not have a work sample that is connected to the proposed project, we encourage you to use the work sample context field to guide the reviewers to the connections you want them to see.

If the application includes multiple core artists who have not worked together before, select a sample that you feel most strongly connects to the proposed project.

We encourage you to submit what you already have, rather than generate something solely for the purposes of applying. Please note that marketing reels are generally not successful in MAP’s process.

Which formats does the application accept?
You may upload a file (.pdf, .jpg, .m4a, .mp3, .wav, .avi, .mov, .mp4) or provide a URL and, if applicable, password. A field for cue points or page ranges is available so that you don’t have to edit the sample to a particular length.

Can I see an example of a work sample context note?

– Example for those submitting in-process documentation: These are the first 9 pages of the play’s second act. The cast will collectively devise the dance on page 43. We’ll use techniques that our company has developed over the past two years, which draw from the influences noted in our bio.

– Example for those submitting a past work: These are the first 3 minutes of a 45-minute composition. Please focus particularly on the instrumentation and rhythmic choices. These are good indicators of my compositions generally, and this section highlights some phrasing choices that I plan to investigate further in the proposed project.

Does my work sample have to be from the past five years?
No, there is no restriction on when your work sample must have been made.

DEMOGRAPHICS + DATA

Would you provide an example of how I might fill out the demographics section?
MAP requests that you only report demographic information for the “core artists” listed in Part A of the Project Team section (the 1-3 individual artists and/or artist companies/ensembles with the most decision-making responsibility), and do not include the additional collaborators listed in Part B.

– Example A: Core Artist #1 is an individual artist who identifies as Thai American. Core Artist #2 is an individual artist who identifies as Afro Cuban. For the question “Which option(s) best describe how the core artist(s) would define their race/ethnicity or races/ethnicities,” the artists might select “Asian, Pacific Islander,” Black, African American,” and “Latina/o/x/e.” For the question “How many of the core artist(s) identify as people of color/people of the global majority/BIPOC,” the artists would select “All of the artists (100%).”

– Example B: Core Artist #1 listed is an ensemble of three people, one who identifies as straight and two who both identify as lesbian. For the question “How many of the core artist(s) identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, asexual, two-spirit, and/or queer+,” they would select “Most of the artists (more than or equal to 50%),” as ⅔ of their team would fall under the lesbian, gay, bisexual, asexual, two-spirit, and queer+ umbrella.

We acknowledge that these categories will not reflect the nuances of everyone’s identity. Applicants who wish to share more may do so in the final question, “Is there any additional demographic information you would like to share?”

Why is MAP collecting demographic data?
MAP staff collect this data to better understand which communities we are and are not serving. Our findings will inform our future programs. Your answers are not shared with reviewers.

Do projects need to have a confirmed premiere venue?
No; having a confirmed premiere venue at the time of applying is not an eligibility or assessment criterion.

Q + A

Do I have to be a full-time artist to be a MAP reviewer?
No; MAP reviewers may or may not derive all or the majority of their income from the arts.

The 2022 cohort included community organizers, a place-based artist, an astrologer, curators, high school and university educators, current undergraduate students, masters and PhD candidates, playwrights, poets, producers, (lighting, costume, set, and props) designers, choreographers, composers, librettists, a taiko artist, guitarists, violinists, a flutist, jazz pianists, stage managers, actors, an opera singer, Bharatanatyam practitioners, directors, cultural workers, a therapist, a mask maker, a concertmaster, presenters, a permaculturist, administrators, a comedian, and, of course, multi-, inter- and transdisciplinary artists, as well as those who take on multiple titles.

Can I see a list of past reviewers?
MAP has welcomed hundreds of artists and arts workers to serve as decision-makers in the grantmaking process. See past reviewers here.

I was a MAP reviewer in 2022 or another past grant cycle. Can I be a reviewer again?
Yes; being in a previous reviewer cohort does not disqualify you as being a reviewer for MAP’s 2024 cycle, although we generally try to prioritize folks who haven’t reviewed for MAP in the past. With that said, we definitely recommend nominating yourself if you’re interested in serving as a reviewer again.

MAP aims to make the application process as supported as possible. Because of limited staff capacity and the anticipated high numbers of applicants, we designed these tabs to include lots of helpful information. If your question is not answered on this page (or if you just need additional support), we encourage you to reach out directly!

Please allow 1-3 business days for a response.

If you have questions about technical support, we encourage you to check out the Submittable help center.