ease the financial burden borne by museums as a result of their increasing It is impressive to note that twenty years later Congress finds that this mission remains an important federal role. In May, 1995, the House Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunity marked up H.R. 1557. The Committee proposed a continued authorization for the Institute of Museum Services (IMS) at FY 95 appropriation level ($28.7 million) for three years. From the House report: The Committee wishes to acknowledge the contributions of the IMS in For these reasons, and because general operating funds are among the most IMS has been a partner in the development of museum services over the last twenty years: Finally, • IMS reaches museums of all types and all budget sizes, it reaches museums that for geographic or other reasons do not have access to private funders. • IMS grants, based on peer acknowledged merit, leverage additional funds. • IMS requires that museums reach out to the broadest audiences. IMS encourages museums of all sizes to reach for the highest standards of practice in fulfilling their missions. • IMS listens and responds with leadership. One example of the IMS leadership role is its work in strengthening museum school partnerships. Since 1994, IMS has challenged museums to transform their partnerships with schools and actively engage in curriculum-linked programs. Museums can effectively take part in school reform by providing learning opportunities in every school discipline from history and science to mathematics and art. The ultimate goal of this focus is to transform traditional thinking about museums and schools. By working collaboratively, these institutions can make a major impact on the education of our children. The funded projects all have national impact and include: the use of research findings in shaping the learning process in museums; use of interactive telecommunications to expand museum school partnerships; and replicable models for integrating museums resources into student learning through exhibition development, peer mentoring, school reform initiatives and building parent networks. In the first year of this program, IMS had 800 requests for information (10% of the entire museum community) and received 313 requests for funds. Acknowledging that this small program tapped a significant need in the field, IMS raised private funds to convene a national meeting of museum school partners. One hundred twenty five museum educators and school professionals attended the conference, which will be followed with a publication that will be widely distributed. Another example of IMS leadership is the initiation of the National Award for Museum Service. The award places a national spotlight on museums that are central to the life of their communities. While this award provides no monetary compensation it has become a highly sought-after source of recognition. It honors museums that demonstrate an institutional commitment to public service with programs that address social, economic or environmental issues. At a luncheon on Capitol Hill honoring the award winners, recipients described their accomplishments. Bobye List, director of the Brooklyn Children's Museum, NY, related stories of young teens who are a part of the MUSEUM TEAM, a program that addresses the city-wide lack of adequate, supervised, educational activities for school-age children during their nonschool hours. Carlos Tortolero, executive director of the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum, Chicago, IL, spoke movingly about the Museum's success in creating a home for Mexican culture "sin fronteras" (without borders) and the Museum's advocacy work on issues of central concern to the Mexican people. David Goudy, director of the Montshire Museum of Science, Norwich, VT inspired all with the story of how this regional science resource galvanized community support and spearheaded a unique center for recycling and waste management for the entire state of Vermont. Ron Chew, director of the Wing Luke Asian Museum, Seattle, WA, provided eloquent testimony to the power of a community-based organization that is on the vanguard of high quality and intensive community involvement. He described creating intergenerational exhibits that engender community pride and raise awareness about the contributions of Asian Pacific Americans in Seattle. And finally IMS has taken leadership by spotlighting museums' role in cultural tourism. Travel and tourism is America's number one service export. In 1994, the travel and tourism trade surplus was $21 billion, 9% of all exports, 40% of service exports. It is America's second largest employer, providing more than 13 million jobs directly and indirectly. In 1994, $417 billion in expenditures and $58 billion in federal, state and local tax revenues were generated through the travel and tourism industry. The October, 1995, White House Conference on Travel and Tourism called for a series of natural and cultural tourism summits to take place throughout the U.S. Recently the Director of IMS was asked to participate in a issues forum, for the travel industry, with the Department of Interior on Tourism and Public Lands. Participants recognized that many tourists visit both parks and museums. With 376,000,000 visitors to national parks and 600,000,000 visitors to museums, both parks and museums are significant to both the domestic and international tourism industry. In 1997, IMS will support museums' cultural tourism initiatives. IMS is truly a model federal agency. Together with the museum community the agency has made the most of a modest federal investment in the nation's museums serving millions of people across the country each year. I hope that you will lend your support to the Administration's request for an additional $2 million for U.S. museums. Institute of Museum Services Reponse to Questions Restructuring Given current funding constraints has IMS developed a downsizing and restructuring strategy? Yes. IMS has developed an agency-wide plan for restructuring the organization, confirmed by the National Museum Services Board. This plan will address the needs of the American public. In most funding categories, and in all administrative services, activities have been proportionally reduced to the cuts we anticipate receiving in 1996. The FY 1996 conference report proposes reductions to IMS's budget. What are you doing to accommodate these reductions into your downsizing and restructuring efforts? Our plan for restructuring IMS includes the following changes: 1) the proposed elimination of the Technical Assistance Grants funding category (merging projects previously eligible for funding under that category to the Professional Services Program); 2) a reduction in the number of annual deadlines in the Conservation Project Support category; and 3) a reduction in IMS administrative activities. How will 1996 funding effect FTE levels? How many actual positions will be eliminated as opposed to open positions that will not be filled? IMS has historically maintained very low administrative costs. IMS is planning to operate without the permanent elimination of any of the nineteen FTEs allotted by the Office of Management and Budget. In 1996, actual attrition and lapse will probably reduce overall FTE usage, saving substantial administrative funds without IMS having to eliminate any FTE positions. In addition, IMS intends to delay filling 3 vacancies, which represent 16% of the agencies total number of FTEs in 1996. This will enable the agency to realize administrative savings to the maximum extent possible while fulfilling the mission of the agency. Did you reduce the number of grant applications and grants awarded? IMS anticipates a final appropriation for FY 96 at 27% below FY 95 levels. As a result projections are that the number of awards will be reduced by the same percentage in nearly all programs. IMS will make FY 96 awards later in the year, so final numbers are not available. As of April 3, 1996, the final deadline for two programs has passed. For those programs, we have an 18% reduction in total applications, which is probably due to the museum community's uncertainty of the funding status of IMS. Did you consult with the museum community before implementing a reorganization plan? The principal programmatic reorganization of IMS is the intent to combine support for training of staff of small museums with support for museum associations. We consulted widely with the museum community and associations to determine if this change would be viewed positively. Response was very positive. The FY 1996 conference level provided a $7 million reduction from the FY 1995 enacted level, yet IMS is showing an increase of 4 FTE. What is the rationale for the increase in staffing? Although the total employment level for the agency approved by OMB is 19 FTE, at this point anticipated budgetary constraints will not permit IMS to fill each of these positions in the current fiscal year. For 1997, the budget year covered by this request, IMS has realigned its operations in many administrative areas. This plan will enable IMS to sustain activities critical to its mission, but will return sufficient funds in Personnel to fill the vacancies experienced in 1995-6. Reauthorization What is the current status of your reauthorization? The Institute of Museum Services reauthorization is an element of three different bills. •H.R. 1557 calls for reauthorization of the Institute within the National Foundation for the Arts and Humanities. It proposes funding at $28.7 million, a three year authorization and continuation of the agency. The bill has been passed by the House Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunity. No floor action is scheduled. ⚫S. 856 calls for creation of an Institute of Museum and Library Services within the National Foundation for the Arts and Humanities. The proposal authorizes the agency for five years with $28.7 million for IMS in FY 96 and such sums through the year 2000. S. 856 has been passed by the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources. No floor action is scheduled. •The Senate attached provisions to the Workforce Development Act (S.143), companion to the Careers Act (H.R. 1617) creating an Institute of Museum and Library Services. Conference on S.143 and H.R. 1617 is underway. Do you expect to see a reauthorization bill pass the Congress before this Committee completes its work on the FY 1997 budget? As of this writing, negotiations on several sensitive provisions related of the Job Training Bill continue. Both the House Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunity and the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources to enact legislation this year. Current reauthorization proposals would take IMS out of the National Foundation for the Arts and Humanities. Do you support this proposal? Our primary concern is to see that legislation is enacted that addresses the interests of the nation's 8000 museums and the 600,000,000 visitors they serve each year. Museums and Education Your budget justification continually refers to education programs. How do you prioritize your grants to ensure that your grants are being used to promote education in the museum setting? As museums are inherently educational institutions, their overall operations are based in their educational missions. Supporting museums' general operations, therefore supports their educational mission. Moreover, applicants to GOS must describe their educational activities in several ways --describing their audience and efforts to broaden it, exhibition activity, interpretative programming activity, how their collections are cared for to ensure their safety for future educational goals, and how collections are used in educational activities. Since each applicant is judged on these responses, only museums offering high levels of education to the public received awards. Currently through Museum Leadership Initiatives, IMS directly supports projects to strengthen museum/school partnerships. In 1996, IMS will joins with three other federal agencies to support an agenda of theoretical and applied research in learning in museums. The results of the research will be applied in museums to further enhance their practices. What has been the result of challenging museums to engage in curriculumlinked programs? Museums have a strong history of working with local school districts to enhance their curricula. In promoting museum/school partnerships, IMS has given museums additional incentives to interact creatively and to work more closely with schools to achieve mutual goals. Museums and local schools have reacted very favorably to the Initiative. Have you incorporated the curriculum-linked program concept into the actual grant? If not, do you think this would be a good policy? For the MLI award, applicants work with their school partners to identify and develop appropriate programming activities to enhance reaching specific curricular goals. General Operating Support What has been the effect of making general operating support grants a twoyear award? Museum staff have commented favorably on the financial stability that is provided by having an award distributed over a two-year period. We also hear favorable reports on the reduced burden of prepare the application materials biannually rather than annually. The maximum amount a museum could receive over a two year period was reduced from $150,000 to $112,500 - this resulted in more museums receiving grant funds in 1994 and 1995. This last benefit, however, has been weakened due to the reduced appropriation. Have you done an analysis of the effect of requiring museums who receive awards for two awards to sit out the next year? In considering the impact of having museums sit out for a year following two consecutive awards, IMS considered the fact that many deserving museums did not receive GOS awards due to inadequate appropriations. As a result (and after soliciting extensive public comment from the museum community on the issue), IMS determined that having those museums sit out for one year would allow other good museums to benefit from GOS awards. The effect of the reduced appropriations for GOS, however, will not permit the benefits we anticipated. Are the policies of a two-year award and the sit-out period being incorporated into your reauthorization? The language of the Museum Services Act has enabled IMS to serve the museum community effectively and responsibly for 20 years. The statute has changed very little over the last twenty years allowing the agency to identify and enact improvement to its |