Observe · Regulate · Protect — since 2007. 19th OIMAP General Assembly: Singapore, 10–12 June 2026. Programme
Training

Award criteria

Eligibility, situation of the country, motivation and expected impact: how the committee chooses scholarship holders.

Updated : October 28, 2026· 3 min read

A transparent selection

Panel (c. 1780–1840)
Panel (c. 1780–1840)

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.

  • Criteria
  • Grid
  • Eligibility

Award criteria in figures

5Scoring criteria
2Examiners per file
6 wksResponse time
27%Acceptance rate

Source: OIMAP Academy.

Breakdown

Motivation and project30%
Expected impact25%
Situation of the country or institution25%
Careers12%
Parity and diversity8%

Weighting of the grid.

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.

Woman Sitting Reading , Georges Lemmen (1905)
Woman Sitting Reading , Georges Lemmen (1905)
The Shepherd, Paulus Potter (1644)
The Shepherd, Paulus Potter (1644)
St. Anthony Reading, Albrecht Dürer (1519)
St. Anthony Reading, Albrecht Dürer (1519)

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

Five criteria
CriterionWeightScore
Motivation and project30%0 to 5
Expected impact25%0 to 5
Situation of the country25%0 to 5
Careers12%0 to 5
Parity and diversity8%0 to 5

Milestones

  1. Submission

    Deadline.

  2. Reading

    Examiners.

  3. Committee

    Decision.

  4. Result

    Notification.

Anonymity

Portrait of a Man, Gustave Caillebotte (1880)
Portrait of a Man, Gustave Caillebotte (1880)
A Lady Reading, Francis Seymour Haden (1833–1910)
A Lady Reading, Francis Seymour Haden (1833–1910)
Carpenter's Plane (1400s)
Carpenter's Plane (1400s)

Individual or institutional file

Bookplate:  Boylston Medical Library, George Girdler Smith (1806–39)

Individual

One applicant
  • Personal project
  • Personal network
  • Employer support useful

Common case.

The Four Seasons, Kano Tan’yū (1668)

Institutional

An institution proposes
  • Priority to collective impact
  • Several officials
  • Agreement

For States.

Taking care over the file

  1. Target

    Programme.

  2. Draft

    Motivation.

  3. Quantify

    Impact.

  4. Support

    Recommendations.

  5. Proofread

    Before submission.

Points to take care over

A committee member

Leaf from a Lectionary with St. Luke (1057–1063)
« The best files are not the most brilliant, but the most concrete: one can see what the applicant will do with the training. »
Dr. Aïcha Diouf, committee member

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?

Useful documents

Contacts

The Doge's Palace, Venice, Richard Parkes Bonington (1826)
The Doge's Palace, Venice, Richard Parkes Bonington (1826)
OIMAP AcademyParis — Head Office+33 1 00 00 05 00formation@oimap.exampleMonday to Friday, 9 a.m. – 5 p.m.

Apply

Presentation  Bowl (1900)

Online application.

Application
Image credits (16)
▲