Awards of Merit Nominations
Nomination Materials and Instructions
Please prepare your nomination materials as a set of digital files and upload them to the CLHO 2022 Awards of Merit Dropbox. We accept the following formats: PDF, Microsoft Office-compatible files (Word, Excel, PowerPoint), JPG, GIF, PNG, TIFF. Please ensure your images are saved at a suitable resolution (150 dpi minimum, 300 dpi maximum) and are properly oriented. This helps us prepare our slideshow for the Awards of Merit Presentation.
If your submission includes a large number of images, we ask you to be mindful of our Dropbox space by not uploading needlessly large files when suitable smaller versions may be created.
For large submissions, you my upload a ZIP file. If your nomination package includes video or other very large files that are available on the web, we prefer that you include links to those files rather than the files themselves. If you have questions about the format of or best way to transfer any of your files, please contact Amrys Williams at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Your nomination will contain the following:
Please ensure that all files adhere to the following naming convention: Nominee-TypeofFile (for instance, TownHistoricalSociety-CoverSheet, TownHistoricalSociety-Narrative, TownHistoricalSociety-Budget, or JohnDoe-CoverSheet, JohnDoe-Narrative). This helps us keep track of all the files in your nomination package. You may also upload a single ZIP file to keep things together.
Download and save the cover sheet form and complete it with the information indicated.
Your nomination narrative should be no more than four pages of 12-point type and should include the following. Please use the numbered headings indicated below to organize your narrative.
Budget (projects only)
Provide a detailed budget for the nominated work. Include all relevant income and expenditures. This should be the budget for the project, not the entire institution. Please note that the size of the budget does not determine awards. We evaluate each project based on the quality of work that was done with the resources reflected in the budget. Bigger budgets do not necessarily mean better projects, or a greater chance of an award. They simply offer context for the committee to evaluate the project.
Letters of Critical Evaluation
Provide two letters from people able to critically evaluate the quality and significance of the nominated project or individual and their work. This does not mean that they need to be critical of the project or person, but that they should come from someone with the relevant knowledge and expertise to thoughtfully describe and assess their significance. Letters of critical evaluation cannot come from individuals affiliated with the nominated organization, project, or individual, or who would otherwise benefit from the nominee receiving the award.
The best letters of critical evaluation come from other professionals in the history and museum field who have firsthand knowledge and experience with the nominated project or individual’s work. Examples of good people to write letters of critical evaluation include: historians, scholars, and practitioners with knowledge of the project’s subject matter or individual’s field of expertise; colleagues in the Connecticut or New England history and museum community, such as curators, authors, museum consultants, or other professionals; or leaders at neighboring history organizations with relevant experience and expertise to the subject matter and/or medium. The type of project or individual’s field of expertise should inform your choice of letter-writers. For an exhibition, you might select a historian with expertise in the period or subject explored, or a curator with knowledge of the types of material on display and the challenges involved in displaying and interpreting it. For an individual, you might invite letters from other professionals in the field. For a digital project, you might choose to have one of your letters be from someone with experience in digital projects of a similar sort.
Letters of critical evaluation should not come from people—whether directly affiliated with the project/nominee/organization or not—who have an interest in the granting of an award. Local government officials, friends of the museum/nominee, local people who visited the exhibit/read the book/attended the program may be able to write a glowing letter or to say what they appreciated about the work, but they are not able to offer a critical evaluation of the project as a work of public history. Letters of this sort do not aid the committee’s ability to assess the value and significance of the nominated work or individual.
The sooner you approach someone about writing a letter to evaluate your project, the better. We recommend you reach out to several people from whom you may wish to solicit letters, invite them to experience the project, and follow up with them about writing a letter of evaluation for your nomination package. For exhibitions, public programs, and other limited-time offerings, it is especially important to approach your letter-writers while they are able to experience the nominated work alongside the rest of the public.
You can think about selecting evaluators as an opportunity to broaden your and your institution’s professional networks in Connecticut and beyond. Are there researchers whose work informed your interpretation who you’d like to know? Are there other museum and history people in the state and region with whom you’d like to collaborate in the future? Reaching out for a letter of critical evaluation is a great way to make that first connection.
If you have questions about selecting evaluators, please contact Amrys Williams at email@example.com.
Please include any available media coverage, reviews, social media buzz, or other publicity for the project or individual being nominated. This need not be exhaustive—a representative sample is fine, no more than five pages please.
Proper documentation is critical to the committee’s ability to evaluate your nomination. The materials you provide as part of your documentation should enable the committee to experience the project to the greatest extent possible. For individual nominations, documentation should demonstrate the work and impact of the individual.
Unless the nominated work is a publication, project nominations must include photographic and/or video documentation. For on-site exhibitions, please provide a floor plan, exhibit script, a selection of representative exhibit labels, and photographs of the exhibition itself. For educational programs and lectures/presentations, please provide a copy of the program (lesson plans, scripts, slide decks, presentation narrative, etc.). If your program was recorded or has other documentation available online, please provide links to those materials. For digital projects available online, simply provide a link or links.
For publications, please either provide a digital copy as part of your nomination package or mail two physical copies to the CLHO office at the address below.
Individual achievement nominations should include details of the individual’s accomplishments, as well as testimonials from individuals. Testimonials may be additional letters of critical evaluation. Please include a complete C.V. or résumé.
If you have questions about properly documenting your nomination, please contact Amrys Williams at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Submitting a Nomination
All nominations must be submitted electronically via the CLHO 2022 Awards of Merit Dropbox by Friday, January 21, 2022. Simply click the link or visit the URL below and you will be prompted to upload your files. Please refer to the nomination checklist below to ensure you are submitting all required files. Incomplete nominations will not be reviewed.
If you are nominating a book or other print publication for consideration, please send two copies of the publication to the CLHO office at the address below. We welcome PDF copies of publications (for the review committee’s use only, of course) to facilitate the circulating of materials to reviewers.
Connecticut League of History Organizations
You will be notified within four days of the receipt of your nomination package to confirm your submission. If you have questions about your nomination, or are having difficulty submitting you materials for any reason, please email Amrys Williams, CLHO executive director, at email@example.com. If you wish to have any nomination materials returned, please make arrangements with her in advance of the deadline.
Nominations are reviewed by the CLHO Awards of Merit Committee, which is composed of at least five history and museum professionals from around the state. The committee includes members of the CLHO Board of Directors, as well as others recruited by the committee chairs. In forming the committee, we try to bring together individuals representing different areas of expertise as well as sizes of institution.
To guide its deliberations, the Awards of Merit Committee considers the following questions for each nomination:
In order to identify promising public history projects, the Connecticut representative to the American Association for State and Local History will look over your nomination and may contact you for potential submission to AASLH’s Leadership in History Awards. For more information about the AASLH awards program, visit https://aaslh.org/programs/leadership-in-history-awards/.
Co-Chair Laurie Masciandaro: Site Manager, Roseland Cottage, Historic New England
Stephen Bartkus: Gunn Memorial Library & Museum
Jamie Eves: Windham Town Historian, Windham Textile and History Museum (Mill Museum)
Elizabeth Malloy: Executive Director, Haddam Historical Society and Thankful Arnold House Museum
Amanda Goodheart Parks: Director of Education, New England Air Museum
If you have questions about the Awards of Merit program, your nomination, or anything else related to the awards, please contact Amrys Williams, CLHO executive director, at firstname.lastname@example.org, or to call the CLHO office at (860) 832-2674. We look forward to receiving your nomination!
2022 Awards of Merit Nominations
Nominations are closed for the 2022 Awards of Merit.
How to Make a Nomination
To begin your nomination, please download the following documents:Nomination Guidelines
You may nominate any work from the previous 18 months. Organizations/individuals may self-nominate for projects only. Please read this webpage or the guidelines and instructions prior to completing your nomination package.
How to Submit
When your application package is complete, please upload all files to the 2022 Awards of Merit Dropbox, following the instructions in the guidelines document and on this webpage.
We hosted Colleague Circle on Friday, December 10 at noon to walk you through the nomination process and answer questions. You can watch the recording on our YouTube channel.
If you have other questions about your nomination, please email Amrys Williams, CLHO executive director.