Why the same artists keep winning grants: it's not rigged, it's untranslated

Cat Dibley, an arts funding specialist with over 13 years of experience as an applicant, assessor, and program designer, argues that the perception of arts grants being rigged is a misunderstanding. She identifies two visible issues: the same names keep winning, and the system favors those with resources. However, she explains that the real problem is a 'translation gap' between bureaucratic funding language and artists' understanding. Grants are scored against criteria like artistic merit, but merit is judged relative to the program's specific aims, not abstract quality. Dibley notes that funders are aware of bias and use moderated panels and conflict-of-interest declarations to mitigate it. She advises applicants to request their scores against each criterion to identify where their reading of the brief diverged. The deeper structural inequity—barriers for culturally diverse, First Nations, regional, and disabled artists—is being addressed through plainer guidelines, support for first-time applicants, and redesigned programs. Dibley emphasizes that the fix lies with program designers, not artists, and that the system is 'untranslated' rather than rigged.