HOW THE ORCHARD PROJECT APPLICATION PROCESS ASPIRES TO OPERATE

APPLICATION FEES:
The Orchard Project will not require an application fee for submissions. However, we do ask that all who submit identify their “first choice” submission as it will guide our evaluation process.

ROUND ONE: THE APPLICATION

All of the OP open submission programs will have two rounds in their application process. The first round will be the same for all labs and consist of the following questions, in addition to asking for program preference and basic info:

• Please tell us a bit about yourself, your work, and the work you aspire to make.
• For most labs, include CV, work samples, collaborators (if any)
• Please tell us a bit about what you are looking to gain from participating in the OP program. Tell us about where you might see your process before and after the OP. Please also tell us about any other developmental opportunities you are participating in or exploring.
• While understanding that this might change, please tell us about the work you are looking to accelerate at the Orchard Project. For most labs, this would include a small project description. For example, for the Episodic lab, we would look for a project description (logline and series overview).
• For all our labs, we would like to also understand anything about the logistics of projects that might identify areas of concern about whether or not the OP could support them. (size/tech)

ROUND TWO: INTERVIEWS

After tabulation of scores from Round One, the Orchard Project will invite a number of applicants for short interviews with review panelists. Before these interviews, applicants at this stage will be invited to anonymous information sessions in which they will be given the opportunity to ask questions about the programs. Interviews will be short and will likely include an opportunity to ask further questions about applications, but the format of these interviews will be up to the panelists. Interviews will be one on one, but may include a non interviewing Orchard Project staff member present to help answer questions and facilitate. All these interviews will be recorded.

REVIEW STRUCTURE

The OP had historically different application protocols for its programs, and in 2021, merged and simplified its applications There are now a two round process for all applications – one round in which to hone the pool of first round applicants to viable proposals, and an interview round in which additional materials may be requested. In 2021, we expanded the number of interviewees and interviewers substantially. The process ends with a live panel dialogue process to make the final selection of support. While final decisions for support will be made by Orchard Project leadership and staff, by creating a process wherein our staff only manages the process in the early phases of the process but does not serve any role in promoting applicants to the final stage, we are endeavoring to create as balanced and open a process as possible.

Using past application pools as a predictor, we are seeing the following contractions occurring after each phase:

• AFTER 1st round applications – pool reduces to 15% of original size
• AFTER Interviews – pool reduces by another 25-50%, to 3-5% of original size

This new model aims to give many more people of various career stages/identities/geographies/etc. the ability to participate as evaluators in the Orchard Project’s application process. In addition to the review structure itself, we will take the following actions to create an evaluation process in accord with the Orchard Project’s organizational goals and values:

SELECTION OF REVIEWERS:

The review cohort’s composition will reflect demographic dimensionality, especially with respect to race, gender, geography, area of expertise, and experience;

Nominations will be now be sourced from the Orchard Project’s constituents and alumni rather than staff;

An honorarium is offered as compensation to evaluators for approximately 10 hours of labor, outside of our orientation. While this work is often framed as a “service to the field,” we acknowledge that inadequate compensation is a significant barrier to participation.

We request that reviewers take personal accountability for:

• Checking in on expectations and assumptions about artistic practice, process and product;
• Practicing openness in reception of unfamiliar artists and organizations;
• Noticing if or when you tend to score artists with whom you are familiar more highly than those with whom you are not familiar;
• Evaluating each project’s alignment on its own terms, rather than through side-by-side comparisons with other projects within the applicant pool;
• Using the Slack channel as a facilitated common space to share questions and concerns about meta-issues that surface during proposal reviews;
• Looking for evidence of research, investigation, and/or experimentation within each unique application. Rather than expecting artists to fit into specific constraints, how can your sense of what “inquiry” looks like expand, by virtue of encountering the applicants’ ideas

SCORING RUBRIC AND SELECTION PROCESS

The curation of the Orchard Project will hopefully open up access to voices currently not represented within the organizations existing systems of support.

After reading each application AND conducting each interview, reviewers will answer a short series of questions including their familiarity with the artists, their numerical score (a quantitative evaluation of the proposal’s degree of alignment with the Orchard Project’s goals), and comments / feedback for the applicant as necessary.