The Problem With Public Art RFPs (And What We Can Do About It)

Last year, my father in-law discovered a leak at our house. Water was seeping through a hole in the outer wall and into the backyard. The problem was likely bigger than what we could handle on our own, so I began looking around for a good plumber. 

Every plumber I contacted discussed their inspection and quoting process for me, and each time it included a fee just to come out to my house and have a look at what was going on. We knew that because the house is old and the pipes had never been replaced in 40 years, that we were probably looking at a whole house re-pipe. The plumbers would draft a plan based on the specifics of our house, and then get me a quote… but again, this was only after I paid for them to come out. 

I am not complaining about this fee. I completely understand it. I am asking someone to send paid staff to my location and draft a plan specific to me. At the very least, the fee would need to be enough to cover their time. From their logic, if I can’t pay the inspection fee, I am also not going to be able to pay for the service itself. The fee makes sense. 

When I get hungry and want to order take out (stick with me, I am going somewhere with this), I look up a place online, look at pictures of their food, read the menu, or maybe even read reviews. Once I have thought it through and decided what I want, I place an order and get the one meal I selected.

What I DON’T expect is for 100 restaurants to make a meal to my specifications, allow me to sample a taste of each, and then dismiss 99 of them and just eat the one. This would be an insane waste of food, and restaurants would go out of business operating like this. 

These professions do not work for free and as a society we do not expect them to, yet clients and public art administrators will often ask artists to do just that, by requesting designs prior to any payment being made. In public art, this process is called a Request for Proposal or an RFP. An RFP is a form of a call-for-artists that requires applicants to submit their artwork with their application if they would like to be considered for the work. 

What often goes unseen or unspoken about, is that this practice has a ripple effect on the financial health of artists and the arts community.

There is a second type of call-for artists called a Request for Qualification, or an RFQ, and you can read more about the difference between these two here. 

RFPs and the Cost We Don’t Count

Let’s run some numbers. 

Let’s say that there is a call for artists in an RFP format. The budget for the project is big enough that working artists that depend on this type of work to make a living are interested in applying. The goals of the project are specific. The arts organization wants to feature a local topic, it is not something that artists would typically just make for the sake of making art. 

It is not uncommon for over a hundred artists to respond to a call, so for our example we will be conservative and say that 100 people created designs and applied.

That’s 100 people workshopping ideas, coming up with a color palette, creating mock ups etc. This might be something an artist works on for days, but let’s say at the very least they work fast and spend a total of five hours dedicated to the designs. 

5 hours x 100 applicants = 500 unpaid hours worked

Let’s low-ball and calculate the minimum wage for this. Currently the federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. Keep in mind that many artists' standard design fee is much higher than this.

500 hours x $7.25 = $3,625 

That’s $3,625 in unpaid labor that the art call pulled away from the arts economy/ community of working artists. This does not sound like the behavior of an organization that feels a responsibility towards uplifting the arts, does it? Time to check in on the mission statement. 

Now, no one is forcing an artist to enter into this process right? So who cares?

With the number of available opportunities being far fewer than the artists that need them to make a living, artists often have to begrudgingly pursue RFP’s despite the fact that they are a perfect example of an exploitative opportunity structure. 

The term exploitative opportunity structure refers to systems where, on the surface, opportunities appear open and accessible, but in reality they systematically exploit those seeking them.

In the arts (and public art specifically), this can show up when:

• Artists are asked to provide free labor (like detailed proposals or sketches) for the chance of being selected, with no compensation for the work if they aren’t chosen.

• The barrier to entry is high (requesting unpaid time) while the odds of success are low, meaning only those with enough financial cushion can afford to keep participating.

• Administrators or clients shift risk onto the artist — requesting unpaid design work, holding competitions, or dangling “exposure” while offering little or no guaranteed return.

• There’s an imbalance of power where artists feel they must participate (or risk missing all work opportunities) even though the terms are unfair or underpaying.

  
  

It’s called an “opportunity structure” because it shapes how people can access opportunities — but when that structure is set up to extract unpaid or underpaid labor, it becomes exploitative. In short, it’s the system that makes exploitation feel like a normal or necessary part of “getting ahead” or “paying your dues,” especially in fields like the arts, entertainment, or other creative industries.

This creates a cycle where only those with enough financial stability can afford to keep applying, while others are pushed out or discouraged. Administrators and clients, often unintentionally, shift the financial risk onto artists by framing unpaid work as part of “the opportunity,” normalizing conditions that would be unacceptable in other professions. Over time, this structure not only drains individual artists but also weakens the sustainability and diversity of the arts ecosystem as a whole.

 RFP’s Can Weaken Project Outcomes

When a public art organization is developing a master plan, common goals may include improving public spaces, enhancing community identity, supporting local artists, ensuring equity and inclusion, and many other positive outcomes for the community. While on the surface, an RFP may seem like a means to an end, we need to pause and question how this way of doing things may pull a public art organization further away from its goals. 

As we have discussed, this format for an art call has a negative financial impact on the arts community, and creates barriers to entry, limiting the diversity of voices that can be included in the project. There are other impacts as well. 

Artists with the skill set needed to participate in a public art call (artistic quality as well as the experience to use the correct materials and processes), are more likely to be full time artists. This means that they are relying on their work schedule to pay the bills, and will be less likely to entertain the idea of participating in a process that asks them to work for free. 

Could you be unintentionally pushing talented and qualified individuals away from your public art project with an RFP? Probably. 

Additionally, by using the RFP method, you rob yourself of the opportunity to work closely with an artist to develop the art work in a direction that works best to meet your goals. The understanding with an RFP is “one and done” . All artists submit a piece of artwork, and you take it or leave it as is. With the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process, a small pool of artists are selected and paid a stipend to develop artwork for the project. There is more room for some back and forth when you are paying for design development. 

To speak from personal experience, we have been selected numerous times for round two of RFQ’s and been happy to spend time making adjustments to the artwork to get it just right for the arts organization. We are being paid to do so and we know that if we do, we are much more likely to get selected to do the final project. 

Consider that artists are not mind readers, and your initial prompt for art inspiration may leave out a bit on context and direction. In the RFQ process, there is room for this development, while in the RFP process, artists have to try and randomly predict what the committee is looking for. While you (as an arts administrator) may get lucky and get what you want out of this situation, why risk depriving the project of a better outcome? 

Real Talk For Artists

Artists are talking. If you’ve been in the industry for a minute, you’ve likely run across a few RFPs and been frustrated by the process. You certainly are not alone. Occasionally I see artists posting online about these experiences and encouraging people to not apply when a new RFP is issued. 

Time for some real talk… 

What these artists are suggesting is something in Education (did I mention I was a teacher for 8 years?) we referred to as the extinction method of behavior modification. The extinction method, in a nutshell, is when you stop reinforcing a behavior, so over time, the behavior decreases or disappears. In our situation it would mean, no one applies for RFPs and eventually the arts community as a whole rejects the process and moves to RFQ’s. 

The problem with the application of this is obvious. This method requires consistency across the board. All artists everywhere would have to simultaneously reject RFPs. Consider how many artists genuinely don’t even know what an RFP is or they think it is the standard. There will always be someone that applies, and the arts committee doing the selecting will never know about the people that aren't applying. They will probably think that the pool of applicants that submitted is all that exists or all that their notice reached. 

 Additionally, there seems to be very little communication from one arts council to the next (I say this as someone that interacts with a number of these groups every year), and there is a clear lack of consistency in how projects operate. There is very little common thread from one to the next. This is fine in some regards, as every city and township has its own flavor, but when it comes to fair treatment of how and when artists are paid, perhaps it is time to get on the same page. 

So what do you do? 

Ultimately you are an adult and it is up to you to decide which calls are a good fit for you. There is no shame in applying to calls that are issued as RFP’s (we’ve all got to eat) especially if you are willing to engage in a conversation about the organization switching to the RFQ format in the future. One of the same artists I saw discouraging people from applying to RFPs, won a massive RFP a few months later…. So they were still applying when the price was right. If you see an RFP and feel so compelled to speak up about it, I encourage you to do so. I have made a sample letter that can be altered and sent to the issuer of an RFP, which you can find below. 

SAMPLE LETTER

Keep in mind, once a RFP is out there, it generally can’t or won’t be redacted or revised. The issuing organization may take your feedback and use it to shape their process moving forward, but the current call will likely still run as an RFP. 

When communicating with an arts organization, be constructive not combative. I prefer to assume the best of most people and want to believe that organizations that issue RFP’s simply do not know any better, and perhaps have not considered the impact that these calls have on the arts community (which may or may not be true, but I want to give them the benefit of the doubt). 

I've lost count of how many times we have been a part of the first mural in an area or the first art call that a town has run. Everyone is learning, so be patient. I’ve often noticed that a city may not know how to hire for the position of a public art administrator, and will bump someone over from a different position, or hire someone from a related field, who may not have much public art experience to speak of. We are all just learning as we go. 

If you feel so compelled to share, the Americans for the Arts organization put together a PDF of best practices for public art calls. It is a good document to have in your tool belt as an artist, and if I were a public art administrator, I’d be happy to have it. You can find the link for it below. 

AMERICANS FOR THE ARTS BEST PRACTICES

When deciding whether or not to apply for an RFP, the first thing I look at (beyond eligibility) is the budget. At the very least, an RFP should have a budget posted and you can decide if the call is worth the risk of losing your time to the creation and submission of the work. If you take this route, I would recommend making artwork that you can recycle down the road, something broad appeal that you may be able to find another client for in the future. Public art calls are very competitive, and you are likely to not be successful with your RFP submission, even if you do jump through all of the hoops. 

If an RFP fails to list a budget, I generally do not apply. It is one thing for me to decide a $50,000 RFP is worth potentially wasting my time creating art for, because the reward is worth the risk. If you don’t know the budget, you can’t really make that determination. Additionally, in my experience I have found that clients or organizations that are afraid to talk money, generally do not have it. 

To Wrap Up

At the end of the day, navigating RFPs is about balancing opportunity with awareness. While these calls can sometimes lead to meaningful projects, they also come with real costs — not just for individual artists, but for the health and fairness of the arts ecosystem overall. By staying informed, choosing carefully, and engaging in respectful conversations with arts organizations, you can help advocate for better practices while still pursuing the work you love. Change takes time, but every thoughtful action — whether applying strategically, offering constructive feedback, or sharing resources — helps move the field toward a more equitable and sustainable future.

If you’re interested in more insights on public art practices, fair opportunities, and strategies for building a sustainable creative career, I invite you to follow me on Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok, and sign up for my newsletter. Stay connected for tips, resources, and conversations that support both artists and arts administrators in creating a healthier, more equitable arts industry.