Greetings All,

Thank you for your responses to my inquiry about Digital Submission Precedents. A summary follows below and is attached.

Best,

Christina

 

San Francisco Arts Commission – Platform: Slideroom

§  We use Slideroom (www.slideroom.com).

§  We publish the RFQ on our website, and mail notification to our mailing list that the opportunity is available. 

§  Applications are all submitted online. 

§  Slideroom does charge us $10 per applicant, but it is so easy to use and takes so much less staff time to administer that it’s worth it for us. 

Contact: Susan Pontious

Program Director

Civic Art Collection and Public Art Program

San Francisco Arts Commission

401 Van Ness, Suite 325

San Francisco, CA 94102

Phone:  415-252-2241 

Website: http://www.sfartscommission.org
e-newsletter: http://sfartscommission.org/newsletter 

 

Palo Alto, CA – Platform: Call for Entry / Slideroom

§  We went through this process maybe 7 years ago with our Procurement team. They misplaced application materials, hated getting the avalanche of envelopes for big calls, and the system was not working for either of us. 

§  Additionally, we have found that you don’t get the best quality applicants when you go with this method. It takes a lot of time, effort and money to put together a packet and mail it. 

§  You want more applicants of higher quality, so going digital is key.

§  We showed them Call for Entry and Slideroom. They actually love not having to deal with our applications. 

§  The advantages of an online platform:

1-      Transparent deadline and notation of when applications were received – no late applications will be taken.

2-      CDs are obsolete and vulnerable to corruption. Most of our computers can’t take a CD.

3-      Procurement doesn’t have to deal with art questions and get buried under hundreds of applicants.

4-      Communications out to all applicants is documented and transparent.

5-      Online jurying results are archived and transparent.

6-      All files can be downloaded and archived for any questions in the future.

7-      Staff time savings is huge – and panelists can score from anywhere without loading a CD.

8-      The amounts of paper saved is huge.

§  I am sure if you walk them through the advantages, they will see that this is the best way to go. Good luck!

Contact: Elise DeMarzo
Public Art Program Director

1313 Newell Road | Palo Alto, CA 94303

D: 650.617.3517  | E: elise.demarzo@cityofpaloalto.org

www.cityofpaloalto.org/publicart 

 

Baltimore Office of Promotion & The Arts – Platform: Submittable.com

§  Transitioned to using submittable.com for almost all of our digital calls and applications. 

§  We are independent of the City's Purchasing Dept. so I cannot speak directly to that aspect, but would be happy to elaborate on our overall experience and lessons learned from adopting submittable across the organization, especially for Public Art calls. 

Contact: Ryan Patterson | RPatterson@promotionandarts.com

 

Maryland State Arts Council – Platform: Submittable.com

§  We just started using Submittable at MSAC for our Public Art Project grant program. I have found it very easy to use and the customer service help is fantastic.

§  We'll see how it goes for the panel review in May, but our goal is no paper and no sharing of large JPEG files, usb sticks, etc...

§  They can do a tour for you.

§  The case for procurement is that online grant applications are the STANDARD for submissions by public agencies procuring art, and for ARTISTS applying - it's more competitive - artist apply because you're using technology that illustrates a professional program they want to work with.  The State of Maryland for A&E (architect and engineering firms) uses an online application too.

https://mdpap.submittable.com/submit

 

Contact: Liesel Fenner   ASLA

Public Art Program Director

Maryland State Arts Council
175 W. Ostend Street, Suite E | Baltimore, MD 21230  
O 410.767.6544 | M 443-447-5533 | E liesel.fenner@maryland.gov