Ethics Position Paper #1 The Capitalization of Collections Preface The American Association for State and Local History

(AASLH) issues periodic Position Papers to assist individuals and institutions in implementing specific components of the Associations Statement of Professional Standards and Ethics (revised 2002). Adopted by the Council on June 21, 2003, Ethics Position Paper #1 provides practical guidelines for interpreting, adopting, and implementing the Associations position on the ethics of capitalizing an institutions collections. Introduction Whether or not to capitalize collections is one of the most important decisions that a museum or historical organization will make. It has the potential of playing a major role in the organizations long-term financial strategy and can make a significant impact on its relationship to governmental agencies and the public. AASLH believes that collections are not financial assets, but constitute a separate category of resource directly fulfilling institutional missions, legal responsibilities, and fiduciary obligations. Reflecting these values, the AASLH Statement of Professional Standards and Ethics is specific: Collections shall not be capitalized or treated as financial assets. Powerful forces may argue on behalf of capitalization. Decision-makers must be knowledgeable about accounting standards and legal requirements and understand the arguments both for and against capitalization. Decisions regarding capitalization must be made consciously at the highest level and in a public manner, and they must be implemented through consistent and definitive policies and procedures. Institutional leaders must be prepared to present their decision persuasively to other public and private decision-makers. Definitions Collections are items or groups of items that are owned by an organization and have been formally accessioned for the exclusive purposes of research, education, interpretation, and exhibition. They may include personal propertyartifacts, documents, photographs, maps, ephemera, etc.and real property, such as historic buildings, structures, and grounds. Collections are different from other organizational property in that they are acquired, recorded, and managed solely to meet the institutions fiduciary purposes, in accord with its articles of incorporation, bylaws, and collection policies and procedures. Capitalization is the act of establishing a cash value on property as an asset within the institutions financial reports. The purchase costs of capital items are not expensed, but are added to the total accrued value of the institutions assets. If donated, the value of capital items is treated as income and increases the value of the organizations assets. A collection is capitalized only if and when it is defined and treated as a financial asset by the institutions policies, practices, and financial statements. An institution may choose to identify its capitalized collections as a type of fixed asset or as a separate category of asset. Although an institution may apply depreciation to capitalized collections as a pro-

rated expense, as a general rule collections appreciate in value, and a depreciation schedule is not applicable. If collections are not capitalized, their value will not be identified within an organizations financial statements as a financial asset. Non-capitalized collections still must be identified as a separate item with an identified cash value, which may appear on the appropriate financial statement, within an auditors note explaining the institutions significant financial policies, or both. Such identification, however, does not constitute or suggest capitalization, unless so specified by the financial policies and identified as financial assets within the financial statements themselves. The sole act of placing a cash value on a collection does not necessarily capitalize it. Appraising a collection for insurance purposes, for instance, establishes a value in case of damage or loss, but it does not by itself capitalize the collection. Appraisal in and of itself offers unique challenges. Some items may have historical value because of the stories they tell far in excess of their monetary value, while other items may fluxuate widely in value in accord with a fickle market over time. In addition, if an item literally cannot be replaced, how does an institution identify a replacement value? An institution also may place a cash value on the collection for political or public relations purposes without capitalizing it. A state historical agency, for instance, might place a cash value on its research collection for the purpose of documenting the states investment over time or to argue for expanded budgetary support without capitalizing that collection. Conversely, if a historical organization uses the value of a collection as collateral against a loan to improve its facilities, those collections are being treated as capitalized financial assets, regardless of any institutional policies and financial statements to the contrary. The AASLH Position on Capitalization First stated in the AASLH Statement of Professional Standards and Ethics in1990 and repeated without revision in 2002, the Associations position on the capitalization of collections is clear: Collections shall not be capitalized or treated as financial assets. Why? First and foremost, 501(c)(3) non-profit corporations and government agencies own, manage, interpret, and share historical resources in fiduciary trust on behalf of the citizens within the states in which they are incorporated. Even though a historical organization may be a private corporation, its collections are considered part of the public domain. Thus, when an institution owns and manages a collection, it acts as a fiduciary agent of a broader community. That is why museums and historical organizations are exempt from certain taxesbecause of the public value of what they do, including and especially care of the publics collections. By capitalization, however, an institution makes a conscious decision to treat its collections just like any of its other financial assets, no different than bank accounts, investments, office equipment, or real estate. It should not be forgotten that the primary

purpose of a collection is to fulfill the fiduciary purpose of the institution. The primary purpose of a financial asset is to be managed in such a way as to achieve financial stability and health for the organization. As financial assets, capitalized collections are in danger of being used as security, attached by lien, sold, or otherwise encumbered to meet outstanding financial debts and obligations. If the institution is a unit of government, such as a city or state museum, the governing body might be forced to sell all or portions of the collections, just like office equipment or a fleet of trucks, to meet payroll or to pay off bonded debt. This is not why the institution acquired its collections, why they have value, or why a donor received a tax deduction for contributing a collection to an institution. Capitalization of collections clearly violates the publics fiduciary interests in the collections. Even if an institution does not capitalize its collections, it must take care not to treat those collections as if they were financial assets. During times of financial crisis, an institution might be tempted to sell collections to cover operating expenses, like utilities and salaries, or as security to obtain a line of credit. Not only is this bad financial practice that puts the institutions (and publics) collections at risk, but also it is unacceptable in meeting the institutions fiduciary obligations. Neither economic conditions nor bad financial management are excuses for treating collections as financial assets. Pressures to Capitalize Collections FASB & GASB. The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) of the Financial Accounting Foundation established the standards for the capitalization of collections by private, non-profit institutions in its Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 116 (FASB 116), first published in 1993, which is repeated by the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB). FASB 116 and its GASB equivalent establish standards and procedures for reporting collections on audited financial statements, whether or not they are capitalized. But, neither FASB nor GASB standards require that museums capitalize their collections. Paragraph 11 (pp. 3-4) of the FASB Statement reads as follows. An entity need not recognize contributions of works of art, historical treasures, and similar assets if the donated items are added to collections that meet all of the following conditions: a. Are held for public exhibition, education, or research in furtherance of public service rather than financial gain b. Are protected, kept unencumbered, cared for, and preserved c. Are subject to an organizational policy that requires the proceeds from sales of collection items to be used to acquire other items for collections. There are three key elements in this definition of collections. First, the purpose of collections is not to provide for the financial health of the institution. Second, collections are to remain unencumberedthat is, they are not to be used a security against debt. And third, proceeds from the sales of collections can be used only to enhance the collection.

Condition c has nourished rigorous debate within the professional community, even more than among auditors, on how tightly the acquisition requirement should be applied. Some professional associations demand that proceeds from sales of collections can only be used to acquire other items for the collection. Other organizations, such as the American Association of Museums and the American Association for State and Local History, allow a broader interpretation. The AASLH Statement of Professional Standards and Ethics requires that collections shall not be deaccessioned or disposed of . . . for any reason other than the preservation or acquisitions of collections. There is general agreement among all professional organizations, however, that capitalization is contrary to responsible care of the collections and that, at the minimum, any proceeds from sale of collections must be used only for activitiesspecifically replacement and direct care-that maintain an equivalent value within the collections. Public Agencies. City, county, and state governments are increasingly pressed to identify all of their potential assets in order to obtain the best bond rating and lowest interest rates against long-term debt. It is not surprising that they look at the publicly owned collections as one of the last unidentified sources of financial value. In some cases, auditors may instruct governments to capitalize their museum collections under the guise of GASB requirements. But, once again, GASB standards do not require the capitalization of collections. The bottom line question is this: If a government is in default of its debts, is it actually willing to sell the publics heritage to fund that debt? Governing Boards. Governing boards of private non-profit museums also are under pressure to show the strongest possible bottom line on their financial reports. The FASB definition of collections is exactly the issue that the board must address. Are the institutions collections different than its other assets? If the answer is Yes, then the decision is obvious, and the board will act to protect its collections and will not capitalize them. If the answer is No, then the institution should re-examine its mission, commitment to the public trust, and non-profit status. Other: Insurance Companies, Donors, Press & Public. Insurance companies, particularly those covering directors and officers liability, have been known to request that collections be capitalized in order to improve the balance sheet. They should be resisted. Similarly, donors, the press, and select individuals in the public may inquire as to why the collections are not capitalized. In most instances, an institution can use those inquiries to make and strengthen its case that the public interest is not served by capitalization. Consequences of Capitalizing or Not Capitalizing Collections Consequences of Capitalization. The greatest threat of capitalization is the potential losseven if distantof the collection to the public domain. If an institution chooses to treat its collection as just another financial asset, then it is subject to all of the conditions applied to those assets, including encumbrance and potential loss. This violates the fiduciary relationship of the institution to the citizens of the state in which it is

incorporated, its obligations to the collections donors, and probably its articles of incorporation and very mission as an institution. And it poses a potential public relations disaster. Picture the headline: History Museum places publics heritage at risk to pay salaries. Consequences of Non-Capitalization. The chief financial consequence of not capitalizing collections is that hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions of dollars of potential assets will not appear on the balance sheet. Some auditors and board members may suggest that this negatively affects the public picture of the institutions financial health. Since collections cannot be used to support the daily operations of an institution, the decision to not capitalize actually represents the most accurate financial position. By consciously choosing to protect its (and the publics) collections, an institution acknowledges the public trust for which it receives substantial benefits, honors its mission, and makes a strong public statement of commitment. Picture an alternative headline: History Museum commits to protecting public heritage at all costs. Guidelines for Action Know the Requirements. It is important to know first hand what is required and what is not required regarding financial recordation of collections. Every institution should obtain a copy of GASBs Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 116 or FASBs Statement of Government Accounting Standards No. 116, whichever is appropriate. Dont let someone else interpret the standards for you. Be prepared to make the case for non-capitalization based upon what is allowed and what is in the best interests of the public and your institution. Obtain Legal and Accounting Counsel. There are no legal or accounting prohibitions that prevent any institution from choosing not to capitalize its collection. Engage auditors and attorneys with extensive non-profit experience and detailed knowledge of FASB/GASB 116 and their implications. Public institutions must hold detailed and regular discussions with the senior government auditing and legal agents to which they report. Involve all Stakeholders Early, Publicly, and Often. An institution is acting in the public interest when it decides to protect its collections, and it is appropriate to involve the public in the discussion. Do not be afraid of making the discussion public or of involving the press in the discussion before there is a crisis. It is equally important for governmental institutions that their governing and advisory bodies, overseeing agencies, and authoritative public officials understand that collections are not assets to be traded for salary support, bond ratings, or garbage contracts. The earlier and more publicly all of the stakeholders understand the decision and why it was made, the greater is the chance that a public crisis can be avoided. Make a Conscious Decision. The governing authority is well advised to act consciously, publicly, and officially when it adopts a policy of non-capitalization. The decision must be thoroughly and openly

discussed and its implications understood. This is especially true if the institution is a governmental agency, where the public nature of the discussion often may provide the strongest defense against the pressures to capitalize. It may be valuable to revisit the issue on a regular basisevery three to five yearsto introduce new governing board members to the issues, re-engage key external constituencies, and reaffirm the institutions values. Implement the Decision in the Institutions Policies and Procedures. An institutions policies and procedures provide the best protection against challenges to the decision not to capitalize collections. It is particularly critical that collection policies and procedures restrict the use of funds generated by the sale of collections or the recovery of insurance payments on damaged or lost collections. The more tightly the policies restrict those proceeds to the acquisition and direct care of collections, the more easily they can be defended against challenges. Conclusion Because historical museums and organizations act in public trust, the public interest must be paramount in any decision involving the acquisition, care, interpretation, and use of collections. Therefore, institutional leaders must deliberate carefully before making any decision that might put the collections at risk. Since no accounting standards require that collections be capitalized, any institution that chooses the course of capitalization is making a conscious decision to treat its collections as financial assets, and that decision automatically places those collections at potential risk. AASLH believes that such risk, and therefore the act of capitalizing collections, is inconsistent with the institutions fiduciary responsibility to the collections it maintains and the citizens it serves. CARE Home > Resources > Professional Standards

Professional Standards
PREFACE Museums are by definition institutions designed to serve the public. While they collect, research, and preserve a wide variety of materials and objects, it is their presentations to the general public about these objects through the media of exhibitions and public programs that give museums their distinct and unique character. Such presentations vary widely in their content and style, from paintings in a gallery, to an interactive computer game on the importance of rain forests, to a docent-led tour of school children visiting a zoo or aquarium. Nevertheless, they all share a common purpose to facilitate visitor experiences that are both enjoyable and informative. However, the heterogeneous and voluntary nature of the visitor population presents unique challenges to those who conceive of, design, and implement museum exhibits and programs. A knowledge and understanding of that population is a necessary prerequisite to the realization of the educational goals of museums.

It is in this context that the field of visitor studies has evolved over the years. Starting in the late 20s and gaining momentum since the mid-60s, there is now a considerable body of knowledge (much of it published and available) that clearly demonstrates the value of utilizing information obtained from and about visitors to improve exhibits and programs in their ability to communicate with their intended audiences. In preparing these Standards it is the goal of Committee on Audience Research and Evaluation to promote professionalism and quality in all visitor research and evaluation activities and to increase the institutional commitment of museums to utilize this knowledge in their day-to-day activities. We also recognize that creativity and diversity are needed to keep the field of visitor studies responsive and viable, and so we expect that these Standards will evolve as the field itself evolves, and as museums continue to respond to the forces of change in our dynamic and pluralistic society. The Committee sincerely thanks all those who helped in the preparation of this document, but especially the ground work of the previous Subcommittee on Professional Standards Lois Silverman, Chairperson, with Steven Bitgood, Harris Shettel, George Hein, Minda Borun, Ross Loomis, and Mary Ellen Munley and the more recent efforts completed by the current Subcommittee on Professional Standards chaired by Ilona Holland with Zahava Doering, Ross Loomis, Gretchen Overhiser, Susan Wageman, Metta Freund and Beth Twiss-Garrity.

Committee on Audience Research and Evaluation A Standing Professional Committee of the American Association of Museums

Professional Standards

for the practice of AUDIENCE Research and Evaluation in Museums

Revised May 2003 Committee on Audience Research and Evaluation A Standing Professional Committee of the American Association of Museums Introduction The missions of museums intimately involve and depend upon visitors. Accordingly, museums bear the vital responsibility to understand the needs, interests, and concerns of audiences, actual and potential, and to incorporate this understanding into their policies, practices, and products. Studies of visitors carried out to date amply document the fact that assumptions and speculations about visitors can be both inaccurate and unknowingly biased. For example, visitor experiences and interests often differ in important ways from the expectations and intentions of those who prepare exhibits and other public access programs. In light of repeated findings such as these, the need to support and engage in visitor evaluation, research, and other audience advocacy efforts becomes paramount. Only in this way can museums respectfully and accurately respond to the needs, perspectives, and diversity of

audiences, even as they change over time. While the design and conduct of visitor studies should be undertaken by those who possess the appropriate skills and knowledge, the entire community of museums shares this broad responsibility. This document defines general guidelines for the competent and responsible support and practice of visitor studies, defined as the process of systematically obtaining knowledge from and about museum visitors, actual and potential, for the purpose of increasing and utilizing such knowledge in the planning and execution of those activities that relate to the public. *The word "museum" as used throughout this document refers to all public interpretive facilities and institutions, including zoos, botanical gardens, aquariums, science centers, historic houses, heritage sites, natural parks, etc. Over time, the practice of visitor studies has evolved into a rich, interdisciplinary field, characterized by a variety of methodologies and theories. Those who engage in such studies include social scientists from disciplines such as psychology and sociology, educators, exhibit designers/developers, professional consultants, as well as others. While the needs and skills of these individuals may vary, and while their locus of operation may be within or without the institutions they serve, this document is intended to provide standards of practice that have applicability to all of them. These standards are also intended to serve as useful guidelines to museum studies programs in developing curriculum materials related to visitor research and evaluation as well as to those governmental agencies and private foundations that may support visitor studies. These Standards are divided into three major sections. The first presents the responsibilities of those who engage in and support visitor studies. The second addresses the competencies required to carry out visitor studies. The third section deals with the responsibilities of the museum community at large to support efforts to improve our understanding of the museum visitor. I. RESPONSIBILITIES

While two groups are identified below as having special responsibilities connected with the conduct of visitor studies, (A) those who design and implement them, and (B) those who sponsor and facilitate them, it should be emphasized that anyone connected with such studies shares in these responsibilities. THOSE WHO DESIGN AND IMPLEMENT VISITOR STUDIES HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO: DECIDE whether or not a study is feasible and appropriate, based on a careful consideration of the needs and concerns of the sponsor and the resources available to carry out the study DESIGN methods and procedures that are sensitive to and appropriate for the needs of the study and the supporting institution, the questions and issues raised, the audiences selected, and the constraints imposed. DOCUMENT prior to the initiation of the study an agreement among relevant parties regarding the rationale and objectives of the study, the work to be done, the

role of all individuals involved, the time and funds estimated as required to complete the work, and the rights, restrictions and conditions regarding the publication and dissemination of study findings. COMMUNICATE to project and support personnel the progress of the work being done as well as any problems that may interfere with its successful completion. ADHERE to existing ethics and standards documents that may apply to a particular study and/or methodology, such as those published by the American Association of Museums, the American Psychological Association, the American Sociological Association, the American Evaluation Association, and the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. RESPECT the rights and privacy of all individuals who may be involved in a study. For example, visitors who are asked to participate in a study should be fully informed of the purpose of their participation, given the right of refusal, and be assured their anonymity. REPORT findings and recommendations that are based on the information collected, are in keeping with the original objectives of the investigation, and which acknowledge the known limitations of the study. Distinguish between those findings that meet the criteria of significance, relevance, and practical importance, and those that do not. Care should be taken to describe the composition of the sample and the methods used in sample selection, data collection, and data analysis. DISSEMINATE to the extent possible and allowed, the study design, procedures and findings to other practitioners, and to museum professionals in general, through presentations, publications, and other appropriate forums. Include both the strengths and the limitations of the study and the extent to which findings can be generalized to other settings. THOSE WHO SPONSOR OR FACILITATE VISITOR STUDIES HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO: PROVIDE - the necessary financial, staff, logistical, and other forms of support, as previously specified and agreed upon. ASSESS - the original plan, its execution, and the outcomes of the study based upon its original objectives, the time and funds required, the recommendations made, and the extent to which the results provide information that leads to improved understanding of, and communication with, visitors. UTILIZE - study findings appropriately, accurately, and in keeping with the original objectives of the study.

II.

COMPETENCIES

While visitor studies are conducted by individuals representing a variety of backgrounds and training, the following areas describe the basic competencies required for professional practice:

1. RELEVANT LITERATURE All professionals involved in the practice of visitor research and evaluation should be familiar with the history, methodologies, past and current developments, and major findings of the field. In addition, there exists a large body of work in areas that have relevance to visitor studies, including educational theory, environmental design, developmental psychology, communication theory, leisure time studies, and marketing research. While it is not possible for any one person to keep abreast of all these fields, professionals share a collective obligation to monitor major directions and findings and to be open to opportunities for the enrichment of the visitor studies field by other relevant areas of inquiry. 2. MUSEUM POLICIES AND PRACTICES All individuals who engage in visitor research and evaluation must understand the practices and procedures of museum operations in general, as well as those of the particular institution for which such work is being conducted. In order to make intelligent study interpretations and recommendations, an understanding of the principles and practices of museum education and the exhibit development process must be acquired. 3. METHODOLOGICAL AND ANALYTICAL SKILLS Those who design and/or conduct visitor studies must possess a working knowledge of social science research design and the related methodological and analytical skills necessary for responsible decision-making and study execution. While some may specialize in a particular methodological or theoretical approach, they must also possess sufficient familiarity with alternative methods and approaches so that they can properly assess and represent the 'best fit" for any given study issue or problem. 4. COMMUNICATION SKILLS Visitor study practitioners must be skilled in effective communication and information-gathering techniques with museum staff at all levels, as well as with visitors. This includes the ability to clearly articulate what is being done, why it is being done, and how it is being done, as well as how the findings will be of use to the institution. 5. FIELD ADVANCEMENT Most involved in visitor research and evaluation have a commitment to the pursuit, dissemination, and critical assessment of theories, studies, activities, and approaches utilized in and relevant to visitor studies. Through conference attendance and presentations, journals and publications, and other formal and informal forums of communication, visitor study practitioners should support the continued evolution of visitor research and evaluation. III. INSTITUTIONAL COMMITMENT AND SUPPORT

The practice of visitor studies can make its most important contribution to the museum community when it is considered to be an integral part of professional museum practices. To realize this, every museum should: ADVOCATE - efforts to increase knowledge and understanding of their audiences, both actual and potential. INCORPORATE - the needs, interests, and perspectives of visitors of different ages, backgrounds, and from all walks of life, in the planning, execution, and revision of exhibits, programs, and other presentations that relate to the museums general public. SUPPORT - the practice of visitor research, evaluation and other audience advocacy efforts within their own institution by incorporating these into both their short term and long term planning and providing the necessary staff and funding. The Committee on Audience Research and Evaluation welcomes critical comments and suggestions. Send them to the committee, c/o the American Association of Museums, 1225 Eye St. NW, Washington, DC 20005.

Standards for Museum Exhibitions and Indicators of Excellence

developed by the Standing Professional Committees Council of the American Association of Museums

INTRODUCTION

Exhibitions are the public face of museums. The effective presentation of collections and information in exhibitions is an activity unique to museums, and it is through their exhibitions that the vast majority of people know museums. Museum exhibitions are complex, and even modest ones require the time, energy, and expertise ofmany people. Museums now realize that effective planning, management of resources, research and interpretation, collections care, marketing, merchandising, design and fabrication, public programs, publications, and fund raising all contribute to the fulfillment of a museum's mission. However, it is vital that we as a profession not lose sight of the importance of the exhibition in its own right.

STANDARDS FOR MUSEUM EXHIBITIONS

An exhibition is successful if it is physically, intellectually, and emotionally engaging to those who experience it. What follows is an outline of exhibition features that generally result in success. A competent exhibit need not demonstrate all of these features. The outline should be viewed as suggestive rather than precisely prescriptive. In fact, there is little that can be--or should be prescriptive about good exhibition design. We should always allow for purposeful--and often brilliant--deviation from the norm. The following standards for museum exhibitions are organized in six major categories followed by descriptions of what constitutes effectiveness for each category and a listing of specific ways the category might be expressed in an exhibition. 1. Audience awareness Did the audience respond well to the exhibition, and was the response consistent with the exhibition's goals? Some specific ways this standard is achieved and demonstrated are: There is convincing evidence that the exhibition achieved its purpose(s) for its intended audiences and/or there is convincing evidence that the exhibition surpassed its intended goal(s) and resulted in unanticipated, positive experiences for visitors. Decisions about content, means of expression, and design are based on decisions about the intended audience. Visitors are given information in a variety of formats to accommodate various needs and preferences. If not, why not? The exhibition is designed to accommodate those who wish to skim as well as those who wish to take more time. If not, why not?

2. Content Does the exhibition respect the integrity of its content? Some specific ways this standard is achieved and demonstrated are: Subject is appropriate to an exhibition format, with its use of collections, environments, phenomena, and other means of physical presentation of content. Significant ideas, based on appropriate authority, are clearly expressed through reference to objects in the exhibition. The content reflects current knowledge of the subject. The subject is of current interest or the exhibition contributes to creating interest in a subject of importance. There is a sufficient number of objects to present the subject of the exhibition. 3. Collections Have conservation and security matters been appropriately addressed? Some specific ways this standard is achieved and demonstrated are: Objects are mounted appropriately. The requirements of good conservation (light levels, climate control) and security are met. 4. Interpretation/Communication Is the information/message of the exhibition clear and coherent? If not, is there a good reason why not? Some specific ways this standard is achieved and demonstrated are: The exhibition title communicates the subject and sounds appealing. There is a clear idea or set of ideas expressed, and those ideas are clear to viewers. There is a discernible pattern to the way content is presented, and if not, there is a good reason why not. There are coherent, easy-to-follow, and consistent formats for presenting information and eliciting responses, and if not, there is a good reason why not.

 Assumptions and points-of-view are clearly identified. If appropriate to the subject matter, the exhibition need not provide definitive answers. Raising questions and providing a forum for ideas may suffice. Specific topics and individual objects are treated in a manner appropriate to their importance. Interpretive media (labels, lighting, interactives, video, etc.) are appropriate to the exhibition's goals, content, and~intended audiences. The exhibition is engaging. Efforts are made to make the subject matter come alive through attractive presentation and opportunities for establishing personal connections and meaning. 5. Design and production Are the media employed and the means used to present them in spatial planning, design, and physical presentation appropriate to the exhibition's theme, subject matter, collection, and audiences? Some specific ways this standard is achieved and demonstrated are: Design elements (i.e. color, lights graphic treatments, exhibit furniture) contribute to and support the exhibition's ideas and tone. Orientation at the start and throughout the exhibition provides visitors with a conceptual, physical, and affective overview of the exhibition. Spatial organization supports the exhibition's organization. Traffic patterns are obvious to visitors and support the exhibition's sequencing of information and experiences. If not, there is a good reason why not. For each element of the exhibition (furnishings, audio-visuals, sound, printed materials, graphics), the materials used and the quality of production are appropriate to the design concept audiences, duration, and budget of the exhibition. 6. Ergonomics: human comfort, safety, and accessibility Is the exhibition physically accessible? Are visitors comfortable and safe while viewing the exhibition? Some specific ways this standard is achieved and demonstrated are: If the exhibition includes any potentially troubling material, visitors are forewarned so they can make informed decisions about whether they want to see it.

 Instructions are given when needed; they are clear and easy to understand. There is seating, as appropriate. Labels are engaging, informative, legible, and easily understood. The exhibition is fully accessible to all its visitors, and the needs of all potential visitors are addressed.
INDICATORS OF EXCELLENCE IN MUSEUM EXHIBITIONS

While many exhibitions achieve a competent level of professionalism, each year there are a few exhibitions that achieve excellence by surpassing standards of practice in scholarship interpretation, and/or design or by introducing innovations that stretch the boundaries of accepted practice. Such exhibitions are highly distinguished and serve as models of the capacity of museum exhibitions to provide transforming experiences visitors so often attribute to them. Some specific indicators of exhibition excellence are: An aspect of the exhibition is innovative. The exhibition offers a new perspective or new insight on a topic. The exhibition presents new information. The exhibition synthesizes and presents existing knowledge and/or collection materials in a provocative way. The exhibition includes innovative uses of media, materials, and other design elements. The exhibition is particularly beautiful, exceptionally capable of engendering a personal, emotional response, and/or profoundly memorable in a constructive way. The exhibition evokes responses from viewers that are evidence of a transforming experience. Such experiences are often characterized in these ways: It was haunting. The exhibition was an absolute eye-opener. I'll never see XXX in the same way again. I was filled with excitement. It knocked my socks off It sent shivers down my spine. I finally got it!

Corporate History Initiative The Corporate History Initiative of AASLH is designed specifically for professionals within corporations or corporate museums who collect and interpret history or use history to market corporations.

Statement of Values and Basic Standards for Corporate Archives and Museums The American Association for State and Local History is a membership association comprising individuals, agencies, and organizations acting in the public trust, engaged in the practice of history, and representing a variety of disciplines and professions. The Association expects its members to abide by the ethical and professional standards adopted by appropriate discipline-based and professional organizations. Corporations, local and national, have played a major role in American society, and that the story of enterprise is important to a full understanding of the history of politics, society and culture in America. This statement of practices is designed to be a standard for the professional practice of collecting, preserving, and interpreting the history of Americas corporate past by American corporations. It is essential for corporate employees to understand that there are specific business benefits to a collections program, and that the collection of historical and archival materials is an active ongoing process designed to assist corporate planning and growth. Corporate archives and museums exist and are important because they: Contribute to an understanding of both the specific firm and the history of the local community Contribute to a broader understanding of American social history Contribute to a greater understanding of the history of the American family Provide a tool for management training Provide valuable public relations and advertising material Preserve an institutional memory that serves corporate planning purposes Provide an accurate legal record and resource for the corporation itself It is important that corporations commit to making the preservation of their institutional history a priority, not only for their business interests, but also as an act of the public trust for the communities in which they reside and that they serve. The following are recommended for the success of a corporate archive or museum program: Adequate, continuing financial support to meet the challenge of caring for the historical memory of the institution in perpetuity, including resources for maintenance and growth Secure, sound storage facilities where the care, conservation, and management of the companys document and artifact collections are a top priority. Since historical

collections are the bedrock upon which the practice of history rests, corporation should always act to preserve the physical and intellectual integrity of their collections Sufficient, adequate staff who are professionally trained to acquire, care for, interpret or make available for interpretation the documents and artifacts of the corporation Interpretation which is based on sound historical scholarship and accurately reflects the facts as they have been documented Adequate planning and balanced program administration, which make historical records accessible for use by researchers, academics, and/or the public Corporate History Initiative Adopted by the Society for History in the Federal Government Executive Council, 8 January 1997, the National Council on Public History Executive Council, 30 March 2000, the Organization of American Historian's Executive Council, 2 April 2000, the American Historical Association Council, 4 January 2001, and Medical Museums Associations, 19 April 2001. In a democracy, a knowledge of history forms the context in which citizens make informed decisions. Historical knowledge also provides personal, family, and community links to the past. Historical understandings of other societies assists individuals in identifying commonalities in the human condition and in negotiating the differences that exist in our increasingly pluralistic world. Museum exhibits play an important role in the transmission of historical knowledge. They are viewed by citizens of diverse ages, interests, and backgrounds, often in family groups. They sometimes celebrate common events, occasionally memorialize tragedies or injustices, and contain an interpretive element, even if it is not readily apparent. The process of selecting themes, photographs, objects, documents, and other components to be included in an exhibit implies interpretive judgments about cause and effect, perspective, significance, and meaning. Historical exhibits may encourage the informed discussion of their content and the broader issues of historical significance they raise. Attempts to suppress exhibits or to impose an uncritical point of view, however widely shared, are inimical to open and rational discussion. In aiming to achieve exhibit goals, historians, museum curators, administrators, and members of museum boards should approach their task mindful of their public trust. To discharge their duties appropriately, they should observe the following standards: 1. Exhibits should be founded on scholarship, marked by intellectual integrity, and subjected to rigorous peer review. Evidence considered in preparing the

exhibit may include objects, written documentation, oral histories, images, works of art, music, and folklore. 2. At the outset of the exhibit process, museums should identify stakeholders in any exhibit and may wish to involve their representatives in the planning process. 3. Museums and other institutions funded with public monies should be keenly aware of the diversity within communities and constituencies that they serve. 4. When an exhibit addresses a controversial subject, it should acknowledge the existence of competing points of view. The public should be able to see that history is a changing process of interpretation and reinterpretation formed through gathering and reviewing evidence, drawing conclusions, and presenting the conclusions in text or exhibit format. 5. Museum administrators should defend exhibits produced according to these standards.

Audience Research