ReadyLaunch grant: behind the scenes of the evaluation process

This spring, we at Readymag announced an open call for the ReadyLaunch grant—part of the Designing Women initiative—and got an enormous number of applications for projects by women and non-binary people. It was quite a task to evaluate all the beautiful ideas and come up with just four grantees, but our team managed to do it and is now lifting the veil on the process. Jump into this article to discover more about the judging criteria and the evaluation process, and read our tips for successful design grant applications.

This is who’s speaking:

Alya Datii, Head of Brand Marketing.

Tatyana Kovalchuk, Editor-in-Chief.

Francisco Pires, Designer at Communication Design.

Esenia Asadullina, SMM and Community Lead.

Getting more than 700 applications in 8 weeks

Tatyana Kovalchuk: We received 700+ applications in a period of 2 months. The applications were completely different in terms of their subject, perspective, and geography, and they relied on different formats. I believe that such a huge number of ideas for women in design implies that something is hurting a lot in the community. Though not all the ideas were the best fit for our grant, it was so relieving to see constructive creative powers going on in the environment. I’m sure that if both a project and an idea are strong, people will definitely find a way to realize it and a place where their goal coincides with the opportunities that grantors are providing.

Francisco Pires: Art always drives change, and female and queer design can be a powerful tool against discrimination, since it can expose issues they face and make their voices more visible, highlighted, and understood. To promote any idea, you need a medium: poetry, literature, music, design, and other forms of art. When you use design in a nonviolent and sometimes romantic way, you’ll definitely reach people, influencing their thoughts without forcing them onto your side. I believe women have a special sensitivity in design that men often don’t, and I hope women and non-binary people speaking up with design will foster changes in the societal status quo more quickly.

Evaluating applications for shortlisting

Alya Datii: Both Designing Women and Readymag are about intentional action, consistent and strategic support of creativity, ‘touching hearts’, and connecting individuals and communities with ideas and opportunities. With that in mind, we focused on designing our grading system fairly, assessing the projects individually and as a whole, and making sure we selected the ones with a clearly formulated scope and the potential to shift the status quo in their respective, even if seemingly narrow, areas of interest.

Our grading system included five key criteria: social impact, media potential, originality, feasibility, and design. Each criterion was described by 3 questions our grading team had to answer, where each ‘yes’ would add one point. For example, to assess the ‘feasibility’ of the project, we answered the following questions: “Are the steps described in the project application clear and realistic? Has the applicant demonstrated experience in their proposed field? Can the project be completed by October 1, 2024?” Each jury member could also add one ‘confidence point’ to projects that personally impressed them. This allowed us to give space and, at the same time, contain the emotional factor of the selection process in a reasonable frame. The ‘feasibility’ and ‘originality’ questions, in turn, helped us understand the intended audiences of the submitted projects.

Francisco Pires: I believe even a contemporary art piece entirely made of a typeface can work if the content effectively matches the visual message and if the medium is chosen correctly. A medium embeds itself in the message, creating a symbiotic relationship and influencing how the message is perceived. However, since I was evaluating proposals for the ReadyLaunch design grant, I based my opinion on design fundamentals, checking if the previous design works were balanced, impressive and fresh-looking, and whether their design appropriately conveyed the content.

Choosing the four grantees

Alya Datii: It was extremely difficult to define the final grantees. The grading system gave us good footing: it summarized the selection criteria into concise questions, which prompted everyone to dig deeper into applications without getting overwhelmed by doubt. At the same time, the ideas were so diverse that it was sometimes difficult to assess them on the same scale. A lot of them came from experiences that were personal, and at the same time, very familiar to our grading ‘jury’.

We were very excited to accept ‘personal’ projects and endlessly inspired to go through the stories and motivations of their creators. Depending on how audiences define ‘personal’, they could find the grantees’ projects personal or not—to me, some of them are personal in a way that transcends the experience of just one person. Intersectional feminist work is very often like that. So, containing the emotional and accepting the role of someone who grades hopes and goals was one of the hardest things I’ve had to do in a while.

After our team graded all 700+ submissions, many of them naturally received the same number of points. That prompted us to review each other’s grades of the top submissions again and again until the leading projects became more obvious. This entailed both non-synchronized voting and a couple of group calls. 

Tips based on nuances we’ve noticed while evaluating applications

Tatyana Kovalchuk: There were a number of applications where people described their life story in great detail but devoted very little—literally two lines—to their ideas and how they were going to fulfill them. So I’d say it would be helpful to check whether you’ve covered all aspects of the application, because it’s equally important for us to know who applied for the grant and what background this person has, and at the same time, we need to understand what we support and how the person will bring the idea to life. Text in an application doesn’t necessarily have to be short—it’s not the volume that matters, but the extent to which this text, with all its volume, answers the purpose of an application. 

 Esenia Asadullina: Nowadays, we all compete for very short attention spans, so you have to capture attention immediately. Clearly articulate your mission and objectives, and make sure your idea is easy to grasp so the people judging your entry will understand the value and impact it will have on the broader community. Use narratives to tell the story behind your idea: personal stories, challenges, and successes can create an emotional connection. And don’t forget to add high-quality graphics and videos to illustrate your points.

Francisco Pires: Regarding the materials provided, sometimes it was difficult to find visuals for the proposed projects or works of applicants, either because applicants didn’t have an online portfolio or the link to it wasn’t working. In such cases, I had to Google the person to see their work, which made the process a bit challenging at times. However, when everything was in its place, my first impressions might change: sometimes, I had a negative first impression, but after seeing the person’s Instagram and their previous work, I significantly changed it.

Alya Datii: When applying for a grant, fellowship, or publication, it’s important to discern the key value proposition of the opportunity and clearly describe how the submission aligns with that. 

When considering social projects in general, realistically selecting a well-defined, shared problem to address and the format that could tackle it is half the success. The other half is finding the balance between honesty and relatability. It’s simple, but it’s not easy.