Museum Assessment Report

8/10/2019 Museum Assessment Report

1/44

San Bernardino

County Museum

Organizational

ssessment

Submitted to

San Bernardino County,

California

by

Museum Management

Consultants, Inc.

San Francisco, California

November 2014


2/44

Museum Management Consultants, Inc.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1

Leadership ....................................................................................................................................... 4

Governance ..................................................................................................................................... 7

Finances ........................................................................................................................................ 11

Staffing .......................................................................................................................................... 18

Visitor Experience ......................................................................................................................... 20

Collections ..................................................................................................................................... 25

Closing Remarks ............................................................................................................................ 29

Summary of Recommendations ................................................................................................... 31

Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 37

Appendix A: List of Interviewees ............................................................................................ 38

Appendix B: AAMs Characteristics of Excellence for U.S. Museums..................................... 39


3/44

Museum Management Consultants, Inc. 1


INTRODUCTION

In June 2014, San Bernardino County retained Museum Management Consultants, Inc. (MMC)

of San Francisco to conduct an organizational assessment of the San Bernardino County

Museum (SBCM), which operates as a department of the County. This report summarizes the

findings from MMCsassessment, which was conducted by Adrienne Horn, MMC President, and

Katie Sevier Potter, MMC Senior Vice President.

Background

Founded in 1952 by the San Bernardino County Museum Association, SBCM opened to the

public in 1957, and was donated to the County in 1961. The Museum opened its current facility

in Redlands in 1974. Today, SBCM includes the main museum in Redlands, the Victor Valley

Museum in Apple Valley, and six historic sites located throughout the County. The Museum is

governed by the Countys Board of Supervisors; in turn, the Board appoints an 11-member

Museum Advisory Commission to advise the Board about Museum issues. The Museum

Association serves as the SBCM membership group and raises additional funds for the Museum.

The retention of MMC followed concerns expressed by County leadership about SBCMs

financial position and operations due to significant challenges with exhibits and contracts;

decreases in revenue, attendance, and staffing; and the departure of the Museums long-time

Director. The assessment was commissioned to evaluate current operations in light of the

challenges facing SBCM, and to make recommendations that will help the Museum prepare forre-accreditation by the American Alliance of Museums (AAM) in 2017.

Accreditation by AAM is a widely recognized seal of approval that brings national recognition

of a museums commitment to excellence, accountability, high professional standards, and

continued institutional improvement. Beyond that, accreditation opens the door to certain

funding and access to collections from other institutions. SBCM was first accredited by AAM in

1973; its most recent re-accreditation was received in 2003. There is significant concern

amongst SBCM staff, Commissioners, and Association Board members that the Museum will

not be ready for the re-accreditation process, which will take a year to complete. In SBCMs2003 re-accreditation, the AAM Accreditation Commission cited three concerns:

The overall quality of interpretation and presentation at the main museum, as well

as the interpretation and physical condition of the historic sites;

The need to stabilize the Museums funding, build the endowment, and bring in

funds to supplement the Countys support; and


4/44



The lack of attention and oversight provided by SBCMs governing structure,

In its award of re-accreditation in 2003, the Accreditation Commission said of these issues that

it expected to see measureable progress made by the time of the next review. Given these

concerns, MMCs assessment is made with consideration of AAMs standards in order to best

position SBCM for re-accreditation.

Methodology

MMC commenced the assessment by reviewing background documents, including financial

reports, the SBCM Strategic Plan 2004-2008, Association by-laws, MOU between the County

and Association, the 2002 AAM Accreditation Visit Report, and 2003 re-accreditation award

notice.1The MMC team visited San Bernardino County July 23-25, 2014, toured the main facility

and grounds, and conducted 25 confidential interviews with County leadership, Commissioners,

SBCM staff, and Association Board and staff (see Appendix A for a list of interviewees). In

addition, MMC researched four benchmark museums that range from a city-owned and

operated museum to a museum that evolved from municipal to private non-profit. The full

Benchmark Reportwas submitted under separate cover, but findings from the study have been

interspersed throughout thisAssessment Report, as appropriate. Figure 1 provides an overview

of the Benchmark Museums.

Figure 1. Overview of Benchmark Museums

Organization Location

PopulationA

Operating

Budget

FY2013

Annual

Attendance

Staff

FTECity County

San Bernardino County

Museum Redlands, CA 69,999 2,088,371 $3,081,777 44,172 22B

Bowers Museum Santa Ana, CA 334,227 3,114,363 $5,071,650 150,000 89

History San Jos San Jose, CA 998,537 1,862,041 $1,594,219 132,000 20

Riverside Metropolitan

Museum Riverside, CA 316,619 2,292,507 $1,259,973 40,000 10

Whatcom Museum Bellingham, WA 82,631 206,353 $2,198,275 73,800 22.5Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 Population Estimates, accessed at http://www.census.gov

B

San Bernardino County does not account for FTE staffing levels; this figure represents the number of regular staff.

1 At the time of SBCMs re-accreditation, the process took over one year to complete. As such, SBCMs re-

accreditation was awarded in 2003, but the site visit and resulting report conducted by the Visiting Committee

were completed in October 2002. Most of the citations in MMCs Assessment Report quote from the Visiting

Committees 2002AAM Accreditation Visit Report.
http://www.census.gov/http://www.census.gov/http://www.census.gov/


5/44



Overview of MMC Assessment Findings

In their discussions with MMC, interviewees expressed strong affection for the Museum. The

size, capacity, and potential of the main museum facility, as well as SBCMs vast collections

were identified by the majority of interviewees as the Museums greatest strengths. The

Museum was described as having wonderful resources and a great framework. Manyinterviewees pointed to SBCMs educational value to the public and its role as a valuable

resource in the community.

At the same time, interviewees were

keenly aware of the issues facing the

Museum. SBCM has experienced a

number of setbacks in recent years,

including the failure to complete a

major new exhibit hall and the loss of

significant grants and contracts. These

obstacles have added to already

decreasing revenues and

membership, and have been

accompanied by cuts in staff. Attendance, a key indicator of health and reach in the community,

has fallen 59% since FY02 (see Figure 2). Together, these challenges and resource depletions

have resulted in major program cutbacks, which only serve to deepen the decreases in revenue,

attendance, and membership. The County has provided additional funding for the current and

recent fiscal years to cover losses, but changes need to be made to stop the downward spiral

taking place at SBCM.

Everyone involved with SBCM expressed the same desire for the Museum to return to good

health and remain an asset in the community. The following pages present further detail on the

key issues facing the Museum and MMCs recommendations to address those issues while

positioning SBCM for re-accreditation.

It is worth noting that many of MMCs recommendations require an outlay of resour ces, but itis our belief that several of these steps are necessary not only to ready the Museum for re-

accreditation, but also to rebuild the Museum for long-term success. It will fall to the County to

prioritize the solutions to the issues presented in this report and allocate resources accordingly.

Most important, this assessment is just the first step; this information should be used in the

coming months to rethink SBCMsrevenue model, revise the organizationsStrategic Plan, and

recruit the Museums next Director.

109,032

53,530

64,708

44,172

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

Figure 2. SBCM Attendance FY02-FY13


6/44



LEADERSHIP

SBCMs Director since 2002, Robert McKernan, stepped down in April 2014, leaving many

advocates of the Museum concerned for SBCMs future without a director during a time of

organizational hardship. This was not the first volatility in SBCM leadership; between 1996 and

2001, SBCM had four different directors before McKernan, a member of the curatorial staff,

was elevated to the interim, and then full-time, Director position. As the AAM Accreditation

Visit Reportnoted in 2002, This museum has had a very unfortunate history of problematic

leadership. By all measures, McKernan was a stabilizing force after this period of volatility,

having the confidence of both the staff and the County Supervisors, as noted in the AAM

Accreditation Visit Report.

While McKernans tenure was praised by interviewees for its successes, including re-

accreditation by AAM, expanded facilities, the addition of new branch museum sites, large

contracts, and a focus on curatorial matters, the majority of interviewees felt the Museum has

lost its focus over the years.Many interviewees described the Museum as curator centric,

focusing more on the role of SBCM curators than on the Museumspublic or business sides.

According to interviewees, this led to an emphasis on revenue through large research contracts.

These contracts inflated revenues and staffing, but when some were mismanaged and lost,

SBCM was left without a key source of revenue. These losses are at the heart of SBCMs current

financial crisis and reflect what many feel are misplaced organizational priorities.

MMC heard about numerous projects that were started, but never finished over the last few

years. In addition to the loss of contracts, the most notable example is the incomplete Hall of

Geological Wonders. The Hall, a 12,000 square foot, three-story addition to the main museum

facility, is intended to showcase SBCMs collections in new, interactive exhibits. The project

broke ground in 2007, but work on the Hall stopped mid-installation, and the County has filed a

lawsuit against the design studio for breach of project agreements.

The Museum has lacked follow-through on its stated strategic direction as well. The SBCM

Strategic Plan 2004-2008, which was facilitated by MMC and included participation from

various stakeholder groups, lays out a detailed vision and goals for the Museum, along with

measurable steps to achieve those goals. Upon reviewing the Strategic Planin 2014, it appears

that it could have been written today. The same issues exist today as did ten years ago, with the

addition of new challenges that have brought the Museum to a crisis point.


7/44



Forces outside the orgranization: Needs of "customers" and

other stakeholders Competitors and allies Social, economic, political,

technological forces

Opportunities/Threats

Strenths/Weaknesses

Forces inside theorganization:

Resources

Capabilities

Mission / Purpose/ Goals

SBCM needs renewed strategic thinking about the future, including an honest assessment of

what is the right fit for the Museum as it considers its unique value to the County.

Figure 3. Finding the Fit

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Recommendation #1: When hiring SBCMs next Director, prioritize experience with the

business side of operations. While a curatorial background is beneficial, SBCM is in need of

management and business acumen that can provide leadership during a difficult time. SBCMs

next Director will lead an organization with significant challenges and tremendous potential for

growth. It will be crucial to find the right candidate with the expertise and energy required to

take on these challenges and leverage opportunities. As such, MMC strongly recommends

engaging an objective third party with experience in recruiting leaders for cultural organizations

to conduct the search.

Recommendation #2: Prior to updating the SBCM Strategic Plan, there is need for a short-

term action plan to guide the Museum through its current challenges. Toward that end, MMC

What is needed

and feasible in your

service area?

What do you

intend to do?

What are you

capable of doing?

THE

FIT


8/44



recommends a Bridge Plan be developed as a roadmap for the next one to two years, until a

new Director can be hired and a full, long-range planning process can be conducted.

Recommendation #3: Once a new Director is in place, update the SBCM Strategic Plan to

reflect the current environment and provide strategic direction for staff. A StrategicInstitutional Plan is identified by AAM as one of the five core documents

2 deemed

fundamental for basic professional museum operations,3 and will be required for re-

accreditation.

2The five core documents are: Mission Statement, Institutional Code of Ethics, Strategic Institutional Plan, Disaster

Preparedness/Emergency Response Plan, and Collections Management Policy. With the exception of the Strategic

Institutional Plan, MMC heard that SBCM has current versions of each of these documents.3American Alliance of Museums, Introducing the Core Documents, accessed at http://www.aam-

us.org/resources/assessment-programs/peer-review/peer-review-newsletter/introducing-the-core-documents


9/44



GOVERNANCE

SBCM is governed by the Countys five-member Board of Supervisors. The San Bernardino

County Museum Advisory Commission was established as the liaison between the Board of

Supervisors and the Museum to provide advice and assistance to the Board with regard to

museum matters. The Museum Association is an independent 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation

whose purpose is to provide funds to assist with supporting the Museums mission-related

activities.

Board of Supervisors & Advisory Commission

Through its interviews, MMC found that members of the Commission and Association are

passionate about the Museum and feel the importance of serving as advocates for the

Museum. However, the Board of Supervisors, Commission, and Association do not seem to

work towards a common goal in supporting the welfare of the Museum. Interviewees

expressed concern that the Board of Supervisors does not provide the level of oversight

expected or needed and that the Museum is not high on the Boards radar. As one individual

said, The Board of Supervisors is not an oversight Board; they are budgetary only.

While the Board of Supervisors appoints the Commissioners, the Commissioners themselves

told MMC that their role is not clear and several felt they did not have the ear of their

Supervisor. One interviewee said, Roles of the Board of Supervisors and the Commission are

not clarified; each group doesnt know what the other is doing.Many Commissioners said theydo not feel empowered in their role and expressed the opinion that the Commission is without

purpose and should be disbanded.

Association

The Association is governed by a 15-member Board of Directors and employs one full-time

Executive Director and two part-time staff who provide assistance with membership and

administration. The Association operating budget is approximately $250,000 and its

endowment is almost $2 million. The Memorandum of Understanding between the County

Museum and the San Bernardino County Association(2005) articulates the Associationsgoals insupport of the Museums mission as follows:

Provide annual financial resources and in-kind services to the Museum to maintain

quality service to the community and region;

Maintain restricted fund allocation for programmatic and educational activities to

Divisions within the Museum, with input from the Director;


10/44



Provide the vehicle for grants and contracts, which require non-profit status; and

Ensure that Association fiscal campaigns, endowments, and bequests support the

Museums mission-related activities.

MMC heard from interviewees that the Association provides funds to the Museum for special

projects, but not with any consistency. Records show that the Association has provided

$412,238 in cash to the Museum over the last five fiscal years, for both specific projects and

general operating support, and has provided $41,900 this fiscal year. But the Association does

not provide a consistent level of support to the Museum each year, such as an annual donation

based on a percentage of the Associations budget. MMCs interviews revealed that some

Association Board members feel the Associations funds belong to the Association and dont

want to give the money to the Museum. One individual said, The Association Board is here for

themselves, not the good of the Museum. Nobody is working together. Other Association

Board members felt that the Association should provide a consistent level of support, Aportion of the budget that the Museum can count on. This sentiment, that the Association

needs to take a greater role in funding the Museum, was echoed by almost every interviewee

outside the Association as well.

Public-Private Partnership

In 2002, the AAM Accreditation Visit Report recommended that a Board of Directors be

established for oversight of the Museum, but as stated in the report, the County Board of

Supervisors felt reluctant to hand over too much authority to an independent Board. The

SBCM Strategic Plan 2004-2008 also indicated that the governance structure neededclarification, and articulated strategies to be accomplished over five years to reach that goal; to

date, there has been no change. The MMC Benchmark Report gives examples of Benchmark

Museums with affiliated fundraising entities that not only provide funds to their museums, but

through a contract with the governmental entity, are empowered to provide governance

oversight. It is MMCs belief that the current governing structure of SBCM is ineffective, and

given the current challenges facing the Museum, it is time for the County to reconsider the

Museums governance model. If a public-private partnership is not deemed appropriate,

significant changes to the current governing model must be made to ensure proper oversight of

the Museum.

If a joint governing model is to be established, the County could transfer portions of its

governing authority to the Association. At the same time, the Association must agree to take on

a larger role and build its capacity to meet those requirements. If the County and the

Association are to jointly support the Museum in the future, the Association will need to make


11/44



fundamental changes to its operations in order to build its capacity to raise funds that will

support the Museums priorities. If the Association is not able to make these changes, the

County will have to look at other options for the long-term support and operation of the

Museum.

According to AAMs Standards for Museums with Joint Governance,4 there are specific

standards for joint governance, In which the basic responsibilities of governance are shared

between two or more groups. In this governing model:

the standards require that the museum clearly identify all the groups that are

engaged in governance or provision of these vital resources, and the responsibilities of

each group. These relationships should be detailed in formal, written documents (e.g.

memoranda of agreement, memoranda of understanding, operating agreement).

AAM notes that an effective museum is based on good governance authority and a strong

working relationship with the Director. Together the Board and the Director set the future

priorities, manage the resources, and ensure that the museum is accountable to the public.

According to AAM, These expectations apply to all museums regardless of governance type,

structure, or name. If joint governance between the County and Association is pursued, a

written agreement laying out the responsibilities of both sides and the timeline to meet those

responsibilities should be developed.

RECOMMENDATIONSRecommendation #4:Disband the Commission and recruit members, as appropriate, to join

the Association Board of Directors.

Recommendation #5: Develop a public-private partnership between the County and a re-

energized Association, transferring greater governing authority to the Association over time, as

benchmarks are met.

Evaluate and re-write the Memorandum of Understanding between the County and the

Association to be a Management Operating Agreementgiving the Association responsibility for

oversight of the Museum. The MOU might include the following responsibilities:

Engage in fundraising activities to raise private funds to support the Museum;

4American Alliance of Museums, Leadership and Organizational Structure, accessed at http://www.aam-

us.org/resources/ethics-standards-and-best-practices/leadership


12/44



Receive for the benefit of the Museum grants, contributions, fees, and earned

revenue;

Mange the endowment to support Museum activities;

Offer memberships at various levels with appropriate benefits to members;

Employ staff who provide development, marketing, and other services as needed;

Operate the Museums visitor services: admissions operations, facility rental, etc.

The Association shall retain 100% of the revenue from these activities, for the

benefit of the Museum;

Advise the County CEO in hiring, evaluating, and terminating the Museum Director;

Select directors to the Board; one director will be appointed by the County CEO;

Conduct strategic planning for the Museum in order to improve coordination

between the County and the Association;

Provide oversight of the Museums priorities based on the Strategic Plan;

Consider changing the name from Association to Foundation.

Continue County funding of the Museum; the budget should be determined based on an

agreement with the Association.

Transferring oversight to the Association will require a long-term, phased approach, but

progress on the transition should be evident by the time the AAM Visiting Committee conducts

its review of SBCM.

Recommendation #6: Considering the increased expectations for fundraising and the

infrastructure changes that will be required, the Association should partner with a fundraising

consultant who can help with the transition and position the Association for success.

Recommendation #7:To reflect the increased role of the Association, grow the Association

Board to 25-30 members based on specific criteria for selection including ability to raise funds.


13/44



FINANCES

What follows is a broad overview of SBCMs financial position, which has weakened significantly

in recent years. The figures used were derived from internal Museum financial records. The

details behind these figures are not as clear, largely because the SBCM staff members with

historical knowledge of these financial records are no longer with the Museum. Despite this,

MMC is confident in the trends detailed below.

Overview

In FY14, the most recently completed fiscal year, SBCM had an operating budget of

approximately $3.1 million. As Figure 4 shows, expenses have remained relatively flat over the

last five years and revenues have decreased since FY12, resulting in rising net cost to the

County since FY11.

Expenses

SBCM expenses have remained consistent, with the exception of FY12. The largest Museum

expense is personnel, which has declined from

80% of expenses in FY10 to 48% in FY14 (see

Figure 5). This decline reflects staff cuts, but

also brings SBCMs personnel expenses into

line with industry averages. In most museums,

personnel accounts for approximately 50% of

operating expenses, so the staffing costs

relative to overall operating expenses prior to

FY12 were disproportionately high.

$1.5M

$586K

$3.1M $3.1M

$1.6M

$2.5M

$0$500,000

$1,000,000

$1,500,000

$2,000,000

$2,500,000

$3,000,000

$3,500,000

$4,000,000

FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Figure 4. SBCM Revenue and Expenses FY10-FY14

Revenue Expenses Net Cost to County

Figure 5. SBCM Personnel Expenses

FiscalYear

Personnel Expenses

as % of OperatingExpenses

Staff Positions

RegularLimited

Term

2014 47.6% 16 6

2013 54.6% 22 8

2012 53.0% 22 8

2011 74.2% 31 13

2010 80.3% 33 22


14/44



Since FY10, the County has charged all departments, including the Museum, for services and

indirect costs such as administration, overhead, and facility maintenance through the

Countywide Cost Allocation Program (COWCAP). MMC heard that once these overhead charges

are made, SBCM has limited discretionary funds with which to operate the Museum. Some

interviewees believe that if COWCAP charges were not made, the Museums budget would behealthy. Whether or not this is true, COWCAP is a County-wide practice and the Museum

cannot expect to be exempted. SBCMs financial challenges are systemic and would exist with

or without these charges.

Revenues

The greater challenge for SBCM is not controlling expenses, but rather, growing revenues to

cover the true cost of running the Museum. While it is hoped that the County will continue its

generous support of the Museum, relying so heavily on government income leaves SBCM

vulnerable to the fluctuations of the State budget, which affect County finances; the economicclimate; and the changing priorities of the County Board of Supervisors. The lack of diversity in

SBCMs revenues was identified in theAAM Accreditation Visit Reportin 2002:

We also note the museums funding has stab ilized in the short run. However, the

museum must realize its plans to build the endowment and continue to bring in funds to

supplement the countys support.

The need for greater income diversity was noted in the SBCM Strategic Plan 2004-2008as well:

Museums have traditionally received funding

from three sources: earned, contributed, and

endowment revenue. There is a need for SBCM to

develop and stabilize all three. Despite these

words of advice, the Museum still relies most

heavily on government funding (see Figure 6).

Compared to the Benchmark Museums, SBCM is

considerably weaker in contributed and

investment income.

Investment IncomeThe Museum itself does not have significant investments, but the Association has an

endowment valued at almost $2 million as of June 30, 2014. The majority of these endowment

funds are restricted; about 20% of that amount is unrestricted. The endowment is held for the

benefit of the Association, which in turn, supports the Museum, so growth of the endowment

has been identified as a long-term goal in previous planning exercises, and should remain a goal

moving forward. Raising money for an endowment can be challenging, but with an endowment

Figure 6. Income by Source SBCM

Compared to Benchmark Museums FY13

SBCM

Benchmark

Museums

(Median)

Government 73.4% 57.0%

Contributed 5.9% 15.3%

Earned 20.7% 19.8%

Investment 0.0% 3.7%


15/44



generating 4-5% interest per year, it could turn into a stable source of operating funds not only

for Association operations, but also for Museum operations.

Contributed Income

SBCMs contributed revenue includes on-site or other donations made directly to the Museum,and contributions from the Museum Association. Together, this amount is small. There is a

great need for fundraising on behalf of the Museum, and since the Museum, as a County

department, is not allowed to raise funds, it falls to the Association, whose mission is in part to

solicit, receive, manage and distribute funds and gifts for the benefit of the San Bernardino

County Museum system.As the sole vehicle for donations, the time is now to build a strong,

dynamic fundraising program. While it takes time to build such a program and see significant

returns, the foundation is already in place. The Association has a membership base, a Board of

Directors, a history of producing fundraising events, and access to content experts at the

Museum, all of which are fundamental to successful fundraising.

Earned Income

Earned income, which includes admissions, facility rentals, programs, and grants/contracts, has

been on the decline at SBCM as government contracts have been lost. MMC heard repeatedly

from interviewees about the Museums perceived over-reliance on contracts and government

grants. One interviewee said that the Museum built staff by going after contracts and grants,

so the staff got bigger and bigger as a result. At the same time, another interviewee said,

Grant management was an issue and with lost contracts, there is a significant gap in revenues

(see Figure 7). A number of interviewees

felt that contracts need to be sought out

once again to revive the Museums

finances, but MMC also heard that the

contracting entities have lost faith in the

Museum. As one interviewee said, The

Museum cant rely on contracts. We

need to develop private sources of

funding. And as previously noted, anumber of interviewees felt the focus on

grants reflected misplaced organizational

priorities. Assuming that many or most

of the contracts will not return due to a

lack of faith in SBCM, other sources of revenue need to be found or enhanced to fill the gap.

$669,735

$898,043

$36,619$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

$800,000

$900,000

$1,000,000

FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Figure 7. SBCM Grants & Contracts FY10-FY14


16/44



Interviewees expressed concern that the Museum jumps into projects and opportunities

without proper study and has failed to follow through on many occasions. Given the financial

challenges facing the Museum, all current and proposed programs and exhibitions must be

scrutinized for the benefits and costs to the organization.

Other Income Impacting the Museum

While membership and Museum Store revenue are neither derived through SBCM staff efforts,

nor do they directly accrue to SBCM coffers, they impact the Museum financially and as front-

line programs that touch visitors. Given their importance to the Museum, they are reviewed

briefly below.

Membership

Membership is one of many indicators of organizational health. In the case of SBCM, one

becomes a member of the Association. Benefits include free admission to the Museum, theMuseums newsletter, a discount at the Museum Store, exhibit previews, and publications.

Figure 8 shows an 11% drop in total memberships between FY06 and FY14, although there has

been a 66% increase in new memberships. More troubling is the 35% decrease in membership

renewals. A certain percentage of new

memberships are the result of visitors

realizing that a membership is more

cost-effective than paying the

admission fee, and this is to be

expected, but the decrease in

renewals shows that visitors are not

renewing their commitment to SBCM.

The membership program was

recently suspended for a short period

of time; it is MMCs understanding

that the program is being revamped in

terms of pricing and benefits, and during this time, the current program remains open,

although the existing programs details have been removed from the Museum website. While

looking at the new membership pricing, Figure 9 (below) offers a comparison of SBCMs

membership pricing to those of the Benchmark Museums.

237 393

775

505

1,012898

0

200

400

600800

1000

1200

FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Figure 8. SBCM Association Memberships

FY06-FY14

NEW RENEWALS TOTAL MEMBERSHIPS


17/44



Figure 9. SBCM Membership Compared to Benchmark Museums (FY13)

Individual

Membership

Family

Membership

Number of

Members

Membership

Revenues

Cost Per

Member

(Individual

Level)

San Bernardino County Museum $30 $40 995 $47,745 $47.98Bowers Museum $40 $90 8,000 $572,024 $71.50

History San JoseA $50 $50 400 $58,590 $146.48

Riverside Metropolitan Museum $30 $50 400 $8,473 $21.18

Whatcom Museum $50 $75 1,856 $124,305 $66.97A

HSJ does not offer individual/family memberships; at the $50 level, members receive admission for two

SBCMs membership pricing at the entry levels (individual and family membership) are the

lowest of the Benchmark Museums, but the cost per member is lower than three of the four

museums. With enticing benefits and more competitive pricing, there is ample room for growthin revenues. And of equal importance, growth in the membership ranks represents the first

level of donation to the Association. When properly cultivated, members have a strong chance

of becoming donors in the future.

Museum Store

The Museum Store operates as an enterprise fund under the management of the Museum. The

Store offers items that range from books

to jewelry, toys, and items tied to

current exhibitions. The Store is seen asa vital part of the K through 12 visitor

experience, as written by former

Director McKernan in the 2013-14

Adopted Budget document. Figure 10

shows that both revenues and expenses

have been falling over the last five fiscal years. The Store has vacillated between profit and loss,

likely due to a number of factors such as attendance, exhibitions, and inventory, but clearly

operates on a thin margin. MMC assumes that if attendance increases, the Store will see

positive change in its bottom line as well. Having said that, examination of Store operations is

merited to ensure proper expense control and maximization of revenues. The fact that the

Store operates separately from the Museum should be re-examined as well. Operating as a

separate enterprise might be the most beneficial use of current Museum resources, but it is

worth revisiting the arrangement to ensure proper control over Store operations and its

presentation within the Museum. Further, the Museum Store is an important marketing

Figure 10. SBCM Museum Store

Revenues and Expenses FY09-FY13

Fiscal Year Revenues Expenses Net Revenues

2009 $93,196 $107,599 ($14,403)

2010 $72,041 $76,997 ($4,956)

2011 $70,366 $57,711 $12,655

2012 $66,566 $33,664 $32,902

2013 $43,523 $52,083 ($8,560)


18/44



opportunity for the Museum, and regular review of the Store and SBCMs relationship to the

Store is warranted to monitor and refresh the inventory and image presented.

Building a Base

The Museum must build a solid financial base to ensure long-term sustainability. This requiresrethinking the mix of earned income opportunities, creating a dynamic fundraising program,

and building the endowment. By developing this mix of funding while rebuilding the visitor

experience (discussed later in this report), the Museum can also regain the confidence of the

County.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendation #8:Establish internal systems and procedures to ensure detailed financial

recordkeeping.

Recommendation #9: Work with the Association to build a strong fundraising program,

including long-term growth in the endowment, strengthening the membership program,

introducing more cultivation and fundraising events, increasing annual giving, and starting a

planned giving program. While the fundraising program must reside with the Association, these

efforts should be developed in partnership between the Museum and the Association. Planning

should include a Development Plan which outlines both short- and long-term fundraising

actions. Fundraising is built on relationships, and both the Museum and the Association have

work to do to cultivate new and existing relationships that will, over time, result in financial

support for the Museum.

While MMC heard concern from the Association that the organization is not ready to launch

significant fundraising efforts, there are short-term efforts (e.g. Board giving campaign, appeal

letters to current and lapsed donors, membership campaign, events) that can begin while long-

term plans are pursued. A thoughtful approach is merited, but time is of the essence as well.

With the assistance of fundraising counsel (see Recommendation #6), a clear action plan should

be developed to ensure that opportunities are not lost.

Recommendation #10: Work with the Association to establish a consistent annual

contribution from the Association to the Museum for general operating support based on a pre-

determined formula, such as a percentage of the Association budget.


19/44



Recommendation #11:Ensure that the Museum is maximizing revenues in all earned income

categories. To that end, review the expenses and revenues associated with facility rentals,

admissions, programs, etc. With limited resources at hand, programs that bring in revenue and

people to the Museum should be prioritized. For example, SBCM camps were decreased this

summer due to limitations of staff resources; these programs are not only popular, andtherefore have the potential to be a vibrant revenue source, but also serve as a public relations

tool with the community. Canceling camps loses money and sends the wrong message. Greater

effort should have been made to keep the camps, whether that required volunteers, short-term

employees, or reconfiguring the work of full-time staff.

Recommendation #12: Based on a Strategic Planthat outlines the Museums future direction,

work with the County CEOs office to determine a guaranteed level of funding from the County

to the Museum over the next five years. The Museum has work to do to address its internal

challenges, but losing County funding would only heighten the crisis. The County needs to know

its investment is sound, but if that can be proven, possibly through agreed upon benchmarks, a

guaranteed level of support for SBCM will provide a safety net that is crucial to exiting this

period of financial distress.

Recommendation #13:The Museum needs to do a better job of communicating its value to

the Board of Supervisors. Together with the Association, the Museum should develop stronger

relationships with the Board and cultivate these relationships as they would any major donor.


20/44



STAFFING

With decreasing revenues, SBCM has dramatically decreased its staffing levels; the number of

regular and limited-term staff has decreased 67% since FY08 (see Figure 11). MMC heard that

staff is bare bones and many are overwhelmed and worry that things might drop through

the cracks as a result. A number of

interviewees pointed to open positions in the

curatorial ranks (history and biology) as

potentially detrimental to the collections, and

thus, detrimental to SBCMs chances at re-

accreditation by AAM. These cuts have

impacted SBCMs education programs in

particular after the Education Specialist was

redeployed to care for the Museums live

animals.

It is important to ensure proper coverage of key roles at SBCM, including curatorial and

education, which have a significant impact on visitation and the visitor experience, but as noted

in the Finances section of this report, SBCMs former staffing levels are unsustainable for a

museum of SBCMs budget size.

Organizational ChartThe current organizational chart shows a rather traditional approach to management. The

Director has six direct reports, with departments listed as Curatorial/Exhibits, Education,

Administration, Support Staff, Historic Sites, and Museum Store (see Figure 12).This structure

reflects divisions between departments that should be intertwined, and too many direct

reports to the Director given the staff size. A more compact structure might reduce to three

divisions: Collections and Exhibits, Education and Programs, and Operations & Finance (see

Figure 13 below). Historic sites would come under Collections and Exhibits to represent their

6660

55

44

30 30

22

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Figure 11. SBCM Total Staffing Levels

FY08-FY14

Director

Curatorial/Staff/

Exhibits (6)

Education

(2)

Administration

(2)

Support Staff

(5)

Historic Sites

(6)

Museum Store

(1)

Figure 12. SBCM Proposed Organizational Chart FY14


21/44



status as part of SBCM collections and the overall visitor experience. The Museum Store would

move under Operations & Finance as a revenue generating entity. Given that the two fiscal

specialists on staff have become involved with facilities, rentals, front-line staff, and other

operational concerns, creating an Operations & Finance Department would reflect the true role

of this department.

Re-organization of staff roles has already begun under the leadership of Interim Director

Leonard Hernandez. As the Museum conducts this assessment, and prepares to recruit its next

Director, much of the work being done internally focuses on rethinking operations. This

includes questioning the way staff positions are structured, how certain tasks are completed,

and creating new expectations for leadership and staff. These fundamental changes will be

important to establish greater structure and accountability for the staff.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Recommendation 14: Prioritize the hiring of curators to oversee SBCMs core areas of

collecting and ensure proper staffing to cover education programming. Budgeting for these

positions, as well as a competitive Directors salary, might involve partnering with the

Association to split costs for key roles. This is a relatively common solution utilized in public-

private partnerships and is worth considering for SBCM.

Recommendation 15:Revisit the organizational chart to evaluate core functions and re-align

staff as necessary. Determine ideal staffing levels, but during this time of crisis, continue to

utilize staff in multiple roles and re-establish organizational structures (e.g. staff meetings,

evaluations, accountability) to rebuild the organizational culture.

Museum Director

Collections & Exhibits

(curatorial, historic sites,object collections,

fabrication, exhibits)

Education & Programs

(education and publicprograms, front-line staff)

Operations & Finance

(finance, facilities, HR,rentals, marketing)

Figure 13. Sample Redesign of SBCM Organizational Chart


22/44



VISITOR EXPERIENCE

The visitor experience encompasses every interaction a visitor has with a museum; it includes

marketing and outreach messages, website visits, physical navigation to the museum, and

experiences with exhibits, programs, front-line staff, and visitor amenities on-site.

Exhibits

The core of the SBCM visitor experience occurs on-site with permanent exhibits that appear

static and old fashioned in their approach. Museums have experienced a dramatic shift over the

last decade from an academic approach, in which objects are presented in cases with

identifying information, to a more participatory approach. The basic shift is from an experience

in which the visitor is taught to an experience in which the visitor is fully engaged with the

objects and subject-matter. This shift reflects the changing interests and learning styles of

younger generations, and is fundamental to remaining relevant as a community resource.

SBCMs exhibits were described in the 2002AAM Accreditation Visit Reportas outdated and

lacking excitement and appeal. Further, the Museums Strategic Plan 2004-2008 notes the

SBCMs collections are strong, but:

the presentation of the collection has not kept up with changes in the museum exhibit

and interpretive practices. Visitor expectations of museums today are that they be

interactive and experiential to engage the visitor.

Most of the people interviewed by MMC recognized the need to become more participatoryand modern. As one staff member said, We need to become more client-friendly in terms of

the experience people have at the Museum.

SBCM aspires to upgrade its exhibits with the Hall of Geological Wonders, which is intended to

be a showcase for SBCMs collections while integrating participatory tools in the interpretation.

Due to the issues discussed in the Leadership section of this report, the Hall stands incomplete.

MMCs tour of the Hall revealed a promising and dynamic experience and it is a shame that it

has not been completed. MMC heard from a number of interviewees that the money is out

there to finish the Hall, but MMC also heard that a few major solicitations were mishandled or

left unresolved. Interim Director Hernandez has plans for a phased approach in order to open

portions of the Hall and show the community this exciting project. Interviewees were split

about this approach; while some believe it is good to offer something new to entice visitors,

others believe it means the Hall will never be opened in its entirety. While opening the Hall

should remain the ultimate goal, something must be done to regain momentum on this project.


23/44



Visitors encounter the closed off galleries when they first enter the Museum building, and the

optics alone merit a quick, short-term response to allow visitors to engage with the exhibits and

generate excitement in the community for the project. By showing the Halls potential, the

Museum may be able to leverage donations to complete the project as well.

Temporary exhibitions originating from other museums were presented at SBCM until

sometime around FY02. At that time, the Museum decided to focus on temporary exhibitions

featuring its own collections. MMC heard that traveling exhibitions from outside the Museum

used to cost about $300,000 each, but never made enough money through admissions to cover

these costs. Fundraising for underwriting or sponsorship of exhibitions was not attempted. At

the same time, interviewees agreed that these exhibitions drove repeat visitation and, as stated

in the Museums Strategic Plan 2004-2008, compensated for outdated permanent exhibits.It

is believed that the lack of traveling exhibitions is the main reason behind SBCM s downward

trend in attendance.

Programs and Evaluation

A significant portion of the Museums visitors are children and families, which one interviewee

described as the Museums bread and butter, yet SBCM does not offer much in the way of

interactive exhibitry for this audience. While this audience is the focus of Museum programs,

resource restraints have limited the capacity to carry out these programs. Interim Director

Hernandez explained that the Museum is initiating interactive, intergenerational programs on

weekends. This is a positive step and the Museum should keep moving in this direction.

Many museums in crisis cut programs due to resource limitations, but in fact, this is the last

thing that should be cut as it is the key to engagement with the community, repeat visitation,

ongoing relationships with visitors, and donations. As outlined in AAMs Characteristics of

Excellence for U.S. Museums (see Appendix B for the full document), a core standard for U.S.

museums is that, The museum asserts its public service role and places education at the center

of that role.By cutting programs, the SBCM is sending a message that its educational role is in

jeopardy.

The Museums Strategic Plan 2004-2008recommended developing a master plan for exhibits,

education programs, and the visitor experience using new interpretive strategies, up-to-date

interpretive methods and technologies, and informing this process with audience research and

evaluation. While the Hall of Geological Wonders incorporates much of this advice, the rest of

the Museum exhibits should as well. In 2002, the AAM Accreditation Visit Report noted the

Museums lack of routine evaluation of programs and exhibitions with users, and


24/44



recommended that SBCM shift from its internal focus to focus more externally and determine

what the public is most interested in seeing or doing at the museum, and having a role in what

the museum can do for the community. There is an ongoing need to involve the community in

the development of the Museums activities to ensure they incorporate the diverse languages,

learning styles, and expectations of users.

Awareness in the Community

The visitor experience extends to the Museums presence in the commun ity. Although the

Museum is well respected by those who are familiar with it, interviewees said that in general,

SBCM is not well known. Many in the community visited the Museum as children but have not

returned. What was written in the SBCM Strategic Plan 2004-2008 appears to remain true:

there is limited awareness in the community, an unclear message, and lack of brand identity.

The Strategic Plannotes the causes of SBCMs low profile to be limited market research and

external feedback, marketing that focuses on temporary exhibitions rather than on the

Museum as a community resource, and static exhibits that offer few reasons to return for a

repeat visit.

There is a need to market the Museum in the community to raise awareness and increase the

buzz about current activities as well as about the Museum in general. There has been no

marketing budget since FY10; before that, approximately $40,000 to $70,000 was allocated for

marketing and communications. Current marketing is limited to press releases and participation

on Facebook. A number of interviewees expressed concern about the lack of marketing. As one

interviewee said, They are doing some good things at the Museum, but not many people are

hearing about it.

Museum websites today are key entry points to the visitor experience, offering not only

logistical information about ones visit, but also an introduction or follow-up to the collection,

interactive games, videos, and online gift shop sales. The SBCM website is part of the Countys

website and lacks any visual interest. The website is a reflection of the visitor experience and as

it stands today, does not compel an in-person visit.

Facility & Wayfinding

The main museum in Redlands is a tremendous asset. At almost 67,000 square feet, there is

ample room to display collections and conduct programs. The facility was described by most

interviewees as a key strength of the organization. But the utilization of the building is uneven

and somewhat confusing. Certain areas are filled from floor to ceiling with displays, while

others are largely vacant. And as noted in theAAM Accreditation Visit Report, The organization


25/44



of exhibition halls does not make sense; the exhibit areas become an overwhelming maze

that does not tie together.These issues have not been resolved; there remains a pressing need

for directional signage.

Hours of Operation & Front-Line Staff

The SBCM main museum is open Tuesday

through Sunday from 9 am until 5 pm. During

interviews, MMC heard questions about

operating hours and if they are appropriate.

Figure 14 shows that SBCM is open 11 hours

longer than the median of the Benchmark

Museums. It is worth re-examining the hours of

operation with target audiences in mind. Forexample, if children and families are prioritized

audiences, are these hours ideal for those groups? Or, if young professionals are a target

audience, would it be appropriate to be open one evening each week?

Front desk staff were described as hit or miss in terms of quality. Since these individuals are the

first to greet and orient visitors to the Museum, it is important to have consistency in tone and

message. Developing customer service training for all SBCM front-line staff would establish

expectations for visitor interaction.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendation #16:In order to update the SBCM visitor experience, the Hall of Geological

Wonders must be completed. MMC believes the current approach in phases is a realistic

solution in the short-term, but opening the full experience should be a top priority in order to

revive the visitor experience, increase attendance, and to prepare the Museum for re-

accreditation. MMC believes that monetary support of the Hall capital campaign would be a

worthy investment for the County to consider, and might instill confidence in other potential

donors to help complete the campaign.

Recommendation #17:Launch an experimental space in the Museum to test new ideas with

visitors. This type of informal audience research at the formative stages of exhibit development

can be valuable to planning new exhibits.

Figure 14. Operating Hours of SBCM

and Benchmark Museums

MuseumHours Open

Per Week

San Bernardino County Museum 48

Bowers Museum 36

History San Jose 37

Riverside Metropolitan Museum 45

Whatcom Museum 30

Benchmark Museums (Median) 37


26/44



Recommendation #18:Once finances are in a more stable state, test out the possibility of

bringing in a temporary exhibition from outside the Museum. Prior to committing to an

exhibition, develop a business plan that outlines the financial requirements to break even,

including staff costs, and potential underwriting and/or sponsorships levels.

Recommendation #19: Reinstate a healthy series of educational programs through some

combination of full-time, part-time, and volunteer staff. Current constraints might mean a

leaner set of programs, but programs that bring in participants and are financially beneficial to

the museum should be prioritized. More is not necessarily better; excellence in programming,

even if few in number, should be the driving force.

Recommendation #20: With exhibit designers, curators, and educators, develop a Visitor

Experience Plan for the main museum and branch locations that unifies and strengthens the

visitor experience, including exhibits, education programs, and visitor amenities.

Recommendation #21:Raise funds to increase the Museums marketing and communications

budget to allow for marketing campaigns focused on the Museum as a cultural resource, as well

as specific exhibitions.

Recommendation #22:Redesign the SBCM website to better reflect the visitor experience on-

site and provide more interactive features. Perhaps accomplish this by spinning off from the

County website entirely. This might be a long-term objective, but in the short-term, changes

can be made to insert new information and make the visitor feel like change is happening and

that SBCM is a dynamic and exciting place to be.

Recommendation #23: Re-examine SBCM operating hours with target audiences in mind.

Benchmark hours against local and regional museums and other attractions. Consider opening

later on certain days and/or staying open late one night per month for a family night with

special programming.

Recommendation #24: Develop or utilize an existing customer service training program toensure consistent quality and expectations for front-line staff. Contact banks and/or large chain

stores in the area to see what they might do to include Museum staff in their employee training

programs or offer special training at the Museum.


27/44



COLLECTIONS

SBCM collections include 3 million objects and seven branch museum sites. The object

collections are on view in permanent and temporary displays, and are stored on- and off-site.

With few exceptions, the SBCM collections are owned by the County. In general, the collections

are well cared for and the Museum does a good job of making them accessible to the public

through exhibitions.

Object Collections

Despite the clear strengths of the content and breadth of the collections, there are some

concerns. The SBCM collections are vast, far outnumbering those of a museum its size and

scope. For comparison, the Benchmark Museums hold collections that range from 80,000

(Riverside Metropolitan Museum) to 500,000 (History San Jose); the average collection size

among the Benchmark Museums is approximately 230,000. With 3 million objects, SBCM has a

large burden of responsibility for stewardship. An important part of the upcoming re-

accreditation process will be an assessment of SBCMs ability to properly care for current

holdings, as well as plan for the future. Continual refinement of the collections through

thoughtful acquisition and de-accessioning is imperative to maintaining professional standards.

Similarly, regular collection inventories ensure that records are up to date and accurate, and

that the condition of artifacts and specimens are being monitored.

Along with the size of the collections, MMC also heard comments about the focus of thecollections, which has grown to encompass our region and the greater Southwest, as stated

in the SBCM mission statement. A few interviewees expressed concern that broadening the

scope to include the Southwest has not only added to the increase in object collections, but

also diluted the mission. These interviewees suggested that a narrower focus on the region

would be more manageable for Museum operations and more impactful for visitors.

The Museum currently lacks curators to oversee the history and biology departments. In

addition, the Museums focus on contracts has pulled some curators out of the Museum and

into the field. While this work has had its benefits, it has resulted in less attention to the care,storage, and display of the collections in the Museum. Both the open curatorial positions and

the number of contracts have left many Museum stakeholders worried about the stewardship

of the collections. In 2002, the AAM Accreditation Visit Reportnoted this trend: The extensive

field work and report writing for these contracts prevents the curators from addressing the

curatorial needs of older collections not acquired by these contract activities.


28/44



Many interviewees said the Museum has had a curator-focused culture, and that the

curatorial work has not been viewed in terms of how it feeds the business of the Museum. Both

the public-facing and internal roles of the curators are fundamental to the operations of a

museum today, but given the SBCMs operational challenges, stronger focuson the Museums

visitor experience is merited.

Upgrades to SBCMs collections storage were praised in its 2002 AAM accreditation peer

review. MMC did not have the opportunity to tour all storage areas, but the areas visited

appeared to adhere to industry standards. Having said that, MMC did hear that the building

previously used for temporary exhibits and now used for education programs is also being used

for storage in ways that are not up to the standards seen in the rest of the Museum. This should

be evaluated and resolved in the short-term.

AAMs outline of characteristics of museum excellence includes, The museum is a good

steward of its resources held in the public trust. While MMC is not implying that SBCMs

collections are in jeopardy, current trends have the potential to negatively impact collections in

the future if not addressed in the years ahead. This will certainly be an area of focus during re-

accreditation.

Branch Museum Sites

One area in which collections stewardship is of concern today is with the branch museum sites,

which include the Victor Valley Museum and six historic sites operated by the SBCM. The sites

are spread throughout the County and each one has a different level of visitation, accessibility,

volunteer involvement, and engagement with the community. For example, Daggett Stone

Hotel is not open to the public and generates no revenue while the Victor Valley Museum has

paid attendance, a Board, and a degree of visibility in the community. The John Rains House has

a strong volunteer base and the Assistencia Mission generates revenue by renting out space for

weddings. But on the whole, MMC heard, A lot of people dont know about the historic sites.

Although there are a few exceptions, most of the sites have little community involvement.

During the Museums last re-accreditation, issues related to the status and preservation of thehistoric sites were among the key challenges identified in the resulting report.

5 The AAM

Visiting Committee cited poor maintenance, concerns about caretakers not being trained in

history or interpretation, and poor quality in presentation and interpretation, among other

5Victor Valley Museum became a branch site of the SBCM in 2010 and as such, was not part of the Museums last

accreditation by AAM. The Victor Valley Museum is not an historic site, although interviewees included them in the

category of historic sites in their conversations with MMC.


29/44



concerns. In its letter granting re-accreditation, the Chair of the Accreditation Commission

wrote:

The Commission is greatly concerned about the overall quality of interpretation and

presentation at the historic sites, and their physical conditionwe stress the need for

the museum to make the development of a detailed plan for interpreting and caring forthe historic sites a priority. At the time of the next review, the Commission expects to

see improvements made in this area.

Despite identifying proper stewardship and preservation of the historic buildings as core values

and part of its vision for the future in the Museums Strategic Plan 2004-2008, no interpretive

work has been done at the historic sites since AAMs report in 2002. As stated in AAMs report,

Clearly the historic site program is not a main priority of the museum; it is spread throughout

the County and has not gotten the attention it deserves from the museum nor the support from

the County.

In addition to these preservation and interpretation challenges, none of the branch museum

sites breaks even financially. Six of the sites have an on-site caretaker whose role includes being

available for tours when requested. Only four out of seven sites generate revenue, but in all

cases, the revenues do not cover the staffing and operational expenses. According to estimates

in FY13, the net revenue losses from the branch museum sites totaled over $110,000, which

represented 3.6% of operating expenses that year.

Many of the sites have historic value, but given the lack of attention received by the Museum

and their financial drain on the Museum, it is clear that SBCM is not fulfilling its stewardship

role.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendation #25:Care for current object collections by conducting ongoing inventories,

and determining priorities and policies for de-accessioning.

Recommendation #26:As part of the strategic planning process, refine the Museums missionand the focus of its collections. With the revised mission, explore downsizing object collections

to a more manageable size through extended loans or gifts to organizations that would care for

and utilize these holdings such as universities and natural history museums. Review any

restrictions on de-accessioning objects in the collections as part of this effort.


30/44



Recommendation #27: Properly conserve and store object collections that are currently

housed in the education building.

Recommendation #28: The Museum must determine the future role of the branch museum

site program, as well as the future role of each site individually. Just as each of the sites is

different in scope, visibility, and support, the approach to determining their future role should

be tailored to the individual site. Options for each site include:

1.

Status Quo: Keep the site as part of the SBCM, continuing the current level of

support and accepting the accompanying financial realities.

2. Separate Non-Profit: Spin off the site as an independent non-profit organization.

3. City Ties: Work with the municipality in which the site resides to garner financial

support or transfer ownership to that city.

4.

Sever Ties:If none of the above options are feasible, release the site, accepting the

possibility that it may not survive without its affiliation with SBCM.

Victor Valley Museum and John Rains House each have significant support groups that could be

nurtured and grown, with the ultimate goal of fully supporting their site without the SBCM.

Toward that end, SBCM should continue to build the sustainability of the Victor Valley Museum

by adding capacity that allows the museum to focus on marketing, fundraising, community

outreach, and development of programs and services.The future of the other sites lies in one of

the options above; which approach is chosen for each site should be decided with careful

consideration of the historic value of the property, attendance, financial implications, and local

support. MMC heard a number of interviewees say of the branch sites that theres nobody

else to care for them, but MMC believes that in their current state, the sites are not being

cared for adequately and moving them in different directions will increase their chances of

prospering in the future.

Recommendation #29: After carefully studying and determining future directions for each

branch site, develop anAction Planthat does the following:

Spells out future plans for each site

Identifies a timeline for implementing the plan for each site

Estimates revenues and expenses for the next five years, including potential for newcontributed, earned, and government sources

Details staffing requirements (number of staff, training required, etc.)

Inventories and prioritizes maintenance and upgrades

Align thisAction Planwith the Visitor Experience Plan that encompasses all exhibits, collections,

and programs of the SBCM.


31/44



CLOSING REMARKS

The Museum is facing a time of crisis, including attendance, community awareness, financial

position, and leadership. These challenges are heightened by a feeling amongst SBCM

advocates that the County may not support the Museum in the long-run. Through interviews

and research, MMC believes the County continues to support the Museum and believes in its

value as an educational resource to the citizens of San Bernardino County. At the same time,

the County has become concerned about recent critical issues at the Museum and wants to

evaluate the health of their investment. State and County finances have been impacted by

economic fluctuations and the Museum cannot expect to be immune from these financial ups

and downs without building a more stable base of funding to supplement County funds.

Concern about SBCMsprospects for re-accreditation was one of the key factors motivating this

assessment. Accreditation is important to the Museums future; more to the point, re-

accreditation would indicate that SBCM has maintained museum industry standards for

excellence. While this is certainly a driving force for the years leading up the AAMs 2017 review

of SBCM, of greater concern is the Museums survival. The recommendations in this report are

aimed at rebuilding SBCMs operations, enhancing the visitor experience, and revising the

governance structure to provide proper oversight. As noted previously, many of these

recommendations require resource allocations in the weeks, months, and years ahead. Not all

of the recommendations are necessary in advance of re-accreditation, but are necessary to

rebuild the Museum to a healthy state with long-term sustainability. Of the recommendationsin this report, MMC believes the following should be viewed as key priorities in the near-term:

Continuing to rebuild operational structure for staff, including greater accountability

Developing a plan to diversify sources of revenue

Rethinking the governance structure and planning for a greater role to be played by

the Association

Establishing an ongoing annual contribution from the Association to the Museum for

general operating support

Working with the Association and a fundraising consultant to outline a DevelopmentPlan with short- and long-term goals, and ways in which Museum staff can be

helpful

Dissolving the Commission and recruiting new members to the Association Board of

Directors

Developing a timeline to work with exhibit designers, curators, and educators on a

Visitor Experience Planto guide the main museum and branch museum sites


32/44



Evaluating and deciding the future of each branch museum site

Working with County and Museum staff, MMCs work in the coming months will include a

closer look at SBCMs funding model and developing a jobdescription for the next Director.

Hiring the next Museum Director will be crucial to SBCMs success and should be viewed as along-term investment in SBCMs future.

In conjunction with that work, MMC believes the recommendations in this report should be

organized and agreed upon by stakeholders in the process of developing a short-term Bridge

Plan that will serve as a roadmap for the next one to two years, and revising its Strategic Plan,

which will guide the organization for the next five years. The strategic planning process can

utilize many of the recommendations made in this report to establish priorities and implement

systemic change.


33/44



SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendation #1: When hiring SBCMs next Director, prioritize experience with the

business side of operations. While a curatorial background is beneficial, SBCM is in need of

management and business acumen that can provide leadership during a difficult time. SBCMs

next Director will lead an organization with significant challenges and tremendous potential for

growth. It will be crucial to find the right candidate with the expertise and energy required to

take on these challenges and leverage opportunities. As such, MMC strongly recommends

engaging an objective third party with experience in recruiting leaders for cultural organizations

to conduct the search.

Recommendation #2:Prior to updating the SBCM Strategic Plan, there is need for a short-term

action plan to guide the Museum through its current challenges. Toward that end, MMC

recommends a Bridge Plan be developed as a roadmap for the next one to two years, until a

new Director can be hired and a full, long-range planning process can be conducted.

Recommendation #3:Once a new Director is in place, update the SBCM Strategic Plan to reflect

the current environment and provide strategic direction for staff. A Strategic Institutional

Plan is identified by AAM as oneof the five core documents deemed fundamental for basic

professional museum operations, and will be required for re-accreditation.

Recommendation #4:Disband the Commission and recruit members, as appropriate, to join theAssociation Board of Directors.

Recommendation #5: Develop a public-private partnership between the County and a re-

energized Association, transferring greater governing authority to the Association over time, as

benchmarks are met.

Evaluate and re-write the Memorandum of Understanding between the County and the

Association to be a Management Operating Agreementgiving the Association responsibility for

oversight of the Museum. The MOU might include the following responsibilities:

Engage in fundraising activities to raise private funds to support the Museum;

Receive for the benefit of the Museum grants, contributions, fees, and earned

revenue;

Mange the endowment to support Museum activities;


34/44



Offer memberships at various levels with appropriate benefits to members;

Employ staff who provide development, marketing, and other services as needed;

Operate the Museums visitor services: admissions operations, facility rental, etc.

The Association shall retain 100% of the revenue from these activities, for the

benefit of the Museum;

Advise the County CEO in hiring, evaluating, and terminating the Museum Director;

Select directors to the Board; one director will be appointed by the County CEO;

Conduct strategic planning for the Museum in order to improve coordination

between the County and the Association;

Provide oversight of the Museums priorities based on the Strategic Plan;

Consider changing the name from Association to Foundation.

Continue County funding of the Museum; the budget should be determined based on anagreement with the Association.

Transferring oversight to the Association will require a long-term, phased approach, but

progress on the transition should be evident by the time the AAM Visiting Committee conducts

its review of SBCM.

Recommendation #6: Considering the increased expectations for fundraising and the

infrastructure changes that will be required, the Association should partner with a fundraising

consultant who can help with the transition and position the Association for success.

Recommendation #7: To reflect the increased role of the Association, grow the Association

Board to 25-30 members based on specific criteria for selection including ability to raise funds.

Recommendation #8: Establish internal systems and procedures to ensure detailed financial

recordkeeping.

Recommendation #9: Work with the Association to build a strong fundraising program,

including long-term growth in the endowment, strengthening the membership program,

introducing more cultivation and fundraising events, increasing annual giving, and starting a

planned giving program. While the fundraising program must reside with the Association, these

efforts should be developed in partnership between the Museum and the Association. Planning

should include a Development Plan which outlines both short- and long-term fundraising

actions. Fundraising is built on relationships, and both the Museum and the Association have


35/44



work to do to cultivate new and existing relationships that will, over time, result in financial

support for the Museum.

While MMC heard concern from the Association that the organization is not ready to launch

significant fundraising efforts, there are short-term efforts (e.g. Board giving campaign, appealletters to current and lapsed donors, membership campaign, events) that can begin while long-

term plans are pursued. A thoughtful approach is merited, but time is of the essence as well.

With the assistance of fundraising counsel (see Recommendation #6), a clear action plan should

be developed to ensure that opportunities are not lost.

Recommendation #10:Work with the Association to establish a consistent annual contribution

from the Association to the Museum for general operating support based on a pre-determined

formula, such as a percentage of the Association budget.

Recommendation #11:Ensure that the Museum is maximizing revenues in all earned income

categories. To that end, review the expenses and revenues associated with facility rentals,

admissions, programs, etc. With limited resources at hand, programs that bring in revenue and

people to the Museum should be prioritized. For example, SBCM camps were decreased this

summer due to limitations of staff resources; these programs are not only popular, and

therefore have the potential to be a vibrant revenue source, but also serve as a public relations

tool with the community. Canceling camps loses money and sends the wrong message. Greater

effort should have been made to keep the camps, whether that required volunteers, short-term

employees, or reconfiguring the work of full-time staff.

Recommendation #12: Based on a Strategic Planthat outlines the Museums future direction,

work with the County CEOs office to determine a guaranteed level of funding from the County

to the Museum over the next five years. The Museum has work to do to address its internal

challenges, but losing County funding would only heighten the crisis. The County needs to know

its investment is sound, but if that can be proven, possibly through agreed upon benchmarks, a

guaranteed level of support for SBCM will provide a safety net that is crucial to exiting this

period of financial distress.

Recommendation #13:The Museum needs to do a better job of communicating its value to the

Board of Supervisors. Together with the Association, the Museum should develop stronger

relationships with the Board and cultivate these relationships as they would any major donor.


36/44



Recommendation 14: Prioritize the hiring of curators to oversee SBCMs core areas of collecting

and ensure proper staffing to cover education programming. Budgeting for these positions, as

well as a competitive Directors salary, might involve partnering with the Association to split

costs for key roles. This is a relatively common solution utilized in public-private partnerships

and is worth considering for SBCM.

Recommendation 15:Revisit the organizational chart to evaluate core functions and re-align

staff as necessary. Determine ideal staffing levels, but during this time of crisis, continue to

utilize staff in multiple roles and re-establish organizational structures (e.g. staff meetings,

evaluations, accountability) to rebuild the organizational culture.

Recommendation #16:In order to update the SBCM visitor experience, the Hall of Geological

Wonders must be completed. MMC believes the current approach in phases is a realistic

solution in the short-term, but opening the full experience should be a top priority in order to

revive the visitor experience, increase attendance, and to prepare the Museum for re-

accreditation. MMC believes that monetary support of the Hall capital campaign would be a

worthy investment for the County to consider, and might instill confidence in other potential

donors to help complete the campaign.

Recommendation #17:Launch an experimental space in the Museum to test new ideas with

visitors. This type of informal audience research at the formative stages of exhibit development

can be valuable to planning new exhibits.

Recommendation #18: Once finances are in a more stable state, test out the possibility of

bringing in a temporary exhibition from outside the Museum. Prior to committing to an

exhibition, develop a business plan that outlines the financial requirements to break even,

including staff costs, and potential underwriting and/or sponsorships levels.

Recommendation #19: Reinstate a healthy series of educational programs through some

combination of full-time, part-time, and volunteer staff. Current constraints might mean a

leaner set of programs, but programs that bring in participants and are financially beneficial tothe museum should be prioritized. More is not necessarily better; excellence in programming,

even if few in number, should be the driving force.

Recommendation #20: With exhibit designers, curators, and educators, develop a Visitor

Experience Plan for the main museum and branch locations that unifies and strengthens the

visitor experience, including exhibits, education programs, and visitor amenities.

8/10/2019 Museum Assessmen