A transparent selection

The awarding committee applies a public scoring grid. Each file is read by two examiners, who award points on five criteria. This transparency lets applicants understand decisions and better prepare their file.
The criteria are reviewed each year by the teaching committee. Results are communicated with a reasoned note.
This page details the grid and the points of attention.
Award criteria in figures
Source: OIMAP Academy.
Eligibility
To be eligible, the applicant must work or plan to work in the heritage field, be admitted to the programme concerned, not have received more than two scholarships and present a clear professional project. Nationals of all States may apply, with priority for States whose national income is below average.
Employees of auction houses or galleries are eligible only exceptionally, for a partial scholarship.



The scoring grid
Motivation and project count for 30%: the applicant explains what they want to learn and how they will apply it. Expected impact for 25%: how many people will be reached, what concrete results. The situation of the country or institution for 25%, career for 12% and contribution to parity and diversity for 8%.
Each criterion is scored from 0 to 5. A file must obtain at least 60% of the points to be selected.
Course of the examination
Files are read anonymously for the motivation and impact criteria: the applicant's name and country are masked. The examiners then meet as a committee to rank the files. In the event of a tie, the situation of the country prevails.
The committee has nine members: trainers, former trainees, representatives of Member States and independent experts. A member does not sit on a file from their own country.
Appeal and review
An unsuccessful applicant may ask for an explanation of the decision and lodge an appeal within fifteen days. The appeal is examined by a committee member who did not take part in the first decision. It concerns procedure, not the assessment of the project.
Files not selected may be resubmitted at the next session, with useful additions.
Scoring grid
| Criterion | Weight | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Motivation and project | 30% | 0 to 5 |
| Expected impact | 25% | 0 to 5 |
| Situation of the country | 25% | 0 to 5 |
| Careers | 12% | 0 to 5 |
| Parity and diversity | 8% | 0 to 5 |
Milestones
- Submission
Deadline.
- Reading
Examiners.
- Committee
Decision.
- Result
Notification.
Anonymity



Individual or institutional file

Individual
One applicant- Personal project
- Personal network
- Employer support useful
Common case.

Institutional
An institution proposes- Priority to collective impact
- Several officials
- Agreement
For States.
Taking care over the file
- Target
Programme.
- Draft
Motivation.
- Quantify
Impact.
- Support
Recommendations.
- Proofread
Before submission.
Points to take care over
A committee member

« The best files are not the most brilliant, but the most concrete: one can see what the applicant will do with the training. »
Vocabulary of selection
- Grid
- Scoring table.
- Anonymisation
- Masking of identity.
- Appeal
- Request for review.
- Impact
- Expected effect of the training.
Tips for a good file
A good file is precise, honest and concrete. It describes a real need, a plan for application and a way of spreading what has been learned. Letters of recommendation, short and sincere, carry more weight than conventional praise.
Applicants do well to ask their employer to commit to freeing up time for training and to valuing the return.
Frequently asked questions
What is the acceptance rate?
About 27%.
Are scores communicated?
Yes.
Can one apply again?
Yes.
Where do I apply?
See Application.
Useful documents
Contacts

Apply
Image credits (16)
- High Class Students and Teachers at Bishop Cotton School, Shimla (verso), Raja Deen Dayal (c. 1882–87) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- Panel (c. 1780–1840) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- Woman Sitting Reading , Georges Lemmen (1905) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- The Shepherd, Paulus Potter (1644) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- St. Anthony Reading, Albrecht Dürer (1519) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- Portrait of a Man, Gustave Caillebotte (1880) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- A Lady Reading, Francis Seymour Haden (1833–1910) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- Carpenter's Plane (1400s) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- Bookplate: Boylston Medical Library, George Girdler Smith (1806–39) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- The Four Seasons, Kano Tan’yū (1668) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- Leaf from a Lectionary with St. Luke (1057–1063) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- The Doge's Palace, Venice, Richard Parkes Bonington (1826) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- Interior Drawer for Cabinet, André-Charles Boulle (c. 1690) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- Twilight in the Wilderness, Frederic Edwin Church (1860) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- Gathering among the Members of Office Censor-General (1700s) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
- Presentation Bowl (1900) — Cleveland Museum of Art, CC0 1.0
Cleveland Museum of Art · CC0 1.0
Training scholarships320 scholarships a year covering 30 to 100% of costs: criteria, application and winners.›
Scholarship applicationSubmitting a scholarship file online: documents, calendar, acknowledgement of receipt, result and agreement.›
Scholarship winnersWho the Academy's 3,100 scholarship holders are and what they have achieved since their training.›