Choosing Call-for-Entry Software: A Requirements Worksheet
A vendor-neutral framework for comparing intake, jury governance, post-acceptance operations, costs, accessibility, and data portability.
Last reviewed · Editorial policy
Compare the same real workflow
Feature grids reward vague checkmarks. A requirements worksheet asks each vendor to prove the same scenario with the same data and constraints.
1. Describe the program portfolio
Record calls per year, expected applications, free and paid calls, media and file needs, rolling or fixed deadlines, applications outside visual art, languages, currencies, accessibility needs, staff roles, and reporting obligations.
2. Test artist intake
Ask an artist to start, save, edit, upload, pay, request a waiver, correct a file, and submit from a phone. Verify confirmation, receipts, time zones, support, accessibility, and what happens after a payment or upload failure.
3. Test jury governance
Demonstrate redaction, juror-visible fields, assignments, conflict declaration, recusal, multiple rounds, rubric anchors, progress, ties, score changes, administrative authority, and audit evidence. “Blind jury” is not enough detail.
4. Test the work after acceptance
Have an accepted artist withdraw. Invite a replacement. Receive and inspect artwork, assign a space, print a label, record a sale, release the object, settle the artist, publish the show, and communicate with members. Decide which steps must be native and which integrations are acceptable.
5. Calculate total cost
Use vendor-published or quoted numbers for subscriptions, onboarding, renewal, calls, applications, payment processing, commissions, add-ons, implementation, training, support, exports, and termination. Add staff time and adjacent systems. Label unknowns as “quote required”; do not fill them with third-party guesses.
6. Prove portability and safety
Request sample exports of forms, submissions, original media, scores, assignments, decisions, messages, payments, and audit history. Review roles, least-privilege access, identity and financial data handling, backups, incident communication, retention, deletion, and account termination.
Score with evidence
For each requirement, mark required, valuable, or unnecessary. Record native, configured, integrated, manual, or unavailable; name the plan and permission; attach the demo or documentation evidence; and note the reviewer. Choose the system that best supports the required operating model, not the one that wins the most optional rows.
Vendor pricing sources were checked on July 14, 2026 and can change. Confirm final terms directly.
Sources
Primary sources cited in this guide.
- Submittable pricing — Submittable
- CaFÉ organization pricing — Creative West
- EntryThingy pricing — EntryThingy
- ArtCall FAQ — ArtCall
- Zealous pricing — Zealous
Related guides
Crafted Call vs ArtCall: A Sourced 2026 Comparison
Compare Crafted Call and ArtCall on pricing shape, jurying, exports, exhibition operations, and connected gallery workflows.
Crafted Call vs CaFÉ: A Sourced 2026 Comparison
Compare Crafted Call and CaFÉ on current pricing, jurying, artist reach, and the workflow after selection.
Submittable Alternatives for Art Organizations in 2026
A sourced comparison of call-for-entry platforms for galleries, arts councils, museums, and creative programs.

