Cost/benefitsAppraisals forCollection CareA practical guide

The Museums & Galleries Commission (MGG) isthe national advisory body for museums in theUnited Kingdom. It promotes the interests of allmuseums and galleries and undertakes strategicwork to raise museum standards. The MGCprovides expert and impartial advice, tomuseums and others, and advises theGovernment on museum policy. Through its workthe MGC aims to encourage as many people aspossible to visit and enjoy the nation's museumsand galleries.

© Museums & Galleries Commission16 Queen Anne's GateLondon SW1H 9AA

First published in 1998

ISBN 0 948630 64 7

Designed and printed byBigwood and Staple Ltd.Bridgwater, Somerset.

Cost/benefits Appraisalsfor Collection Care

A practical guide

May Cassar

1

Contents

Page

Foreword 4

Introduction 5

Background 5

W h y Use Cost/benefits Appraisals

for Collection Care? 6

Wha t Does the Exercise Involve? 7

Assessing the Benefits of a Range of Options 7

Assessing the Financial Impact of the Options 8

How Long W i l l the Exercise Take? 10

W h o Should be Involved? 12

Case Studies 15

1. How English Heritage Decided on an Appropriate 17Treatment for the Chiswick Tables

2. How Worcester City Museum Service decided on 25Suitable Premises to Re-house its Reserve Collection

Photocopy Masters . 39

References 46

3

As May Cassar so clearly states in this publication,collection care and collection use are very much twosides of the same coin. I hope that Cost/benefitsAppraisals for Collection Care will help provide you withthe rationale needed to sustain and balance both.

Carole MilnerHead of Conservation and Collection CareMuseums & Galleries Commission

Foreword

4 The collections of objects which are housed in the UK's2500 museums and galleries are held in trust for thenation today, tomorrow and for generations to come.This trust implies a duty of care, for if we want tocontinue to use and enjoy our inheritance, we mustlook after it.

In the interests of sustaining both the collections andthe public life and activity of museums, the Museums &Galleries Commission has long advocated the need fora planned approach to conservation and collectioncare, set in the context of collection management. Tothis end it has produced work on the audit andassessment of needs, benchmarks for measuringprogress towards meeting those needs, and advice andinformation to provide the necessary support along theway. It has promoted a teamwork approach towardsproblem solving and continues to argue the case forlong-term targeted investment on the principle that'prevention is better than cure'.

Cost/benefits Appraisals for Collection Care takes thiswork one valuable step further. Once a situation hasbeen assessed, needs identified and options assembled,the arguments have to be marshalled to make the casefor support and funding which will turn these plans intoaction. In all museum services competition forresources, both internally and externally, is fierce and,to be convincing, any case for support must be basedon contextualised evidence and not just hearsay.

Our aim in producing this guide is to provide museumswith a management tool for doing this. Thesecost/benefits appraisals have been elaborated forconservation and collection care, but they can beapplied in any other museum context. The underlyingprinciples are rooted in good sense, while the processitself constitutes a constructive learning path and avaluable aid to organisational team-building. Asexamples of good practice using this approach increasein number, we shall all be able to use them as casestudies illustrating the long-term benefits of judiciousinvestment in care and treatment.

Introduction

There is a body of practice based on establishedbusiness management principles which useseconomic or investment appraisals as part of decision-making. These techniques, which involve the use ofdecision matrices, have been used in different situationsfrom staff recruitment to the purchase of services andbuilding procurement. While these techniques are notwidely understood by museums, several of the nationalmuseums in the United Kingdom have been requiredto carry out such appraisals, particularly whereproperty procurement has been involved. Morerecently, the Heritage Lottery Fund's document How toPrepare a Business Plan recommended that museumscarry out a cost/benefits appraisal as part of thebusiness plan.

Cost/benefits appraisals have numerous applications infinancial decision-making. This guide develops the useof cost/benefits appraisals for collection care inmuseums. It demonstrates how museums can moveaway from decisions based solely on cost, towards amore balanced assessment of the benefits of differentdecisions. It balances the economic impact of collectioncare with the need for investment in sustainablemeasures to secure the long-term survival of museumcollections.

BackgroundMuseums, like any other organisations, are affected bythe prevailing economic climate which has created asharper competitive environment, a squeeze onrevenue funding and flatter management structures.Yet many organisational decisions remainopportunistic, driven by funding availability. In largemuseums, decisions are also affected by local ornational policies, while in smaller museums, decisionsmay be influenced by the personality of individuals.While shared responsibilities and teamwork are muchadmired, decisions are not always communicatedeffectively in practice, leading to misunderstandings andeven resentment by staff expected to implementdecisions.

A forward plan provides a helpful decision-makingframework Phase 2 of the Museums & GalleriesCommission's Registration Scheme requires museumsto produce a 'Statement of Purpose and Key Aims' andit has published Producing a Forward Plan, MGCGuidelines for Good Practice to assist museums. Planningin this way is important, as it enables existing resourcesto be identified and evaluated, staffing and facilities tobe reviewed and priorities to be established. Thispublication demonstrates that using a forward plan asthe basis for cost/benefits appraisals enables collectioncare decisions to become an integral part of broadermuseum decisions.

Forward planning:

Confirms common goalsEnables sources of income to be assessed andprioritisedCan identify areas that need improvementEnables different projects to be co-ordinatedHelps establish resource requirementsEnables budgets to be allocatedCan ensure efficient use of time

5

6 Changing priorities within museums, with greateremphasis being placed on a variety of uses of thecollection, can create seemingly conflicting demands onresources. In this environment, it is important toconsider all the issues which contribute to a balanceddecision. The external and internal strategic, policy andoperational influences on museum decisions mayappear to have little to do with collection care. Giventhe preoccupation of many museums with fundamentalquestions of survival, they may find it difficult to commitmoney to behind-the-scenes activities such ascollection care unless they are demonstrably central to,and supportive of, the museum's main purpose.

If priorities are discussed in the context of themuseum's aims by people with different ideas aboutcollection use and collection care, they are more easilyunderstood and accepted by everyone. Thisintroduces more complex relationships than the simpleone-to-one with museum objects.

To strike a correct balance between access and care ofcollections, a broad range of interests should beincluded in the discussion. This will ensure that theargument is not tilted either too much in favour ofaccess so that collections are exposed to unacceptablerisk of damage, or too much in favour of collection careto the exclusion of use. The discussion will inevitablyfocus on how resources are allocated. Yet thecomplexity of these decisions also suggests that itwould be wrong to base decisions purely on cost. Astructured framework for discussion based on themuseum's aims and objectives, such as that offered bycost/benefits appraisals, enables a range of points-of-view to be compared and consistent decisions to bereached.

Cost/benefits appraisals can be useful both toindividuals doing a quick check on a decision and toteams doing a similar but more complex exercise.Taking as an example the assessment of a group ofconservation projects, from which one needs to bechosen, both the direct benefits to the objects as wellas the benefits to the museum as a whole should be

considered. This approach encourages decision-makers to identify more closely with collection care,since conservation projects are considered not only ontheir individual merit, but also on their relevance to themuseum as a whole. This is particularly useful whenimportant decisions involving the spending of largesums of money have to be made, especially when, inorder to reap the benefits, higher costs may need to bejustified.

The English Heritage case study demonstrates how aproject can be selected which fits the aims of theorganisation and the individual needs of objects, at acost that can be justified.

Cost/benefits appraisal is a tool with which to checkthat every angle has been considered. It makes aseemingly subjective decision-making process moreobjective. It gives weight to arguments whichotherwise can begin to appear tired and unconvincing.

The Worcester City Museums Service case study is anexample of the impressive thoroughness with whichcollection housing options were considered during theappraisal. :

A cost/benefits appraisal can be a bridgebetween the forward plan and collection careimprovements by :

Assessing the benefits of a range of collectioncare optionsEnsuring a consistent and systematicappraisalEncouraging an efficient use of resourcesEnabling a museum's forward plan to be usedas an effective planning tool[Measuring the effectiveness with which theaims and objectives are implemented

Why Use Cost/benefits Appraisalsfor Collection Care?

What Does the Exercise Involve?

An options appraisal is a stand-alone exercise becauseit is possible to compare the benefits of a range ofoptions without comparing the costs. If a financialappraisal is carried out, the two combined comprise amethod for cost/benefits appraisal.

Assessing the Benefits of a Range of Opt ionsIt is generally considered difficult to make an objectivecomparison of the benefits of different decisions whichhave a qualitative character. Matrices for 'scoring'options against a set of decision criteria have beenmentioned in the Introduction; the decision criteriawhich apply most logically to museums are the aimsand objectives of the forward plan.

Qualitative benefits can be quantified by 'measuring'them in some way according to how well the proposedoptions fulfil the aims and objectives of the forwardplan. Many museums will have drawn up strategic aimsas a result of Registration, but some may not yet havearticulated objectives or supporting elements. The firsttask of the exercise is therefore to produce a numberof specific objectives which underpin the strategic aimsof the plan.

1. Prioritising the aims and objectivesIn order to reflect a museum's priorities, the aims andsupporting objectives should be ranked or 'weighted'according to their importance. As the emphasis onindividual aims and objectives may change from year toyear, so will the slice of the budget that is allocated toeach of them. If an organisation has not ranked its aimsand objectives before, it may start the process by usingthe way the budget has been divided to inform theweighting of the aims and objectives, as was the casewith English Heritage.

Using the Photocopy Masters Sheets 1 to 6, which areprovided at the end of this publication, first theindividual team members, and then the team together,should 'weight' each main aim as a percentage of thewhole (Sheet 1). Whether the plan has three aims orten, the whole is always 100. This weighting is used toestablish the relative importance of the museum's

strategic aims to each other. The same process iscarried out for each set of objectives which supporteach aim. The significance of each objective is alsoweighted as a percentage of the subtotal value of theaim which it supports (Sheet 2).

2. Assessing the optionsTurning next to the list of options from which thepreferred one must be chosen, the question that theteam must now consider is how well each option fulfilsthe decision criteria, in other words, what are thebenefits? The benefits can be quantified by a scoreagainst the 'weighted' objectives (or supportingelements) using Sheet 3. Here the written aims andobjectives of the forward plan must be consulted. Thescore represents the consensus decision that isreached after discussing the benefits of the option. It isexpressed as a number, with I being a low score (ornot meeting the decision criterion at all, ie few benefits)and 5 being the highest score (or fully meeting thedecision criterion, ie significant benefits). The number isin effect a vote for the option and different teammembers may initially give a different score.Depending on the strength of the arguments that areexpressed round the table, the scores may be modifieduntil a consensus decision, expressed as a wholenumber, is reached. Each score is then multiplied bythe respective weight of the objective to which it hasbeen compared and, finally, all the weighted scores ofthe option are added. The team should not move onto consider the next option until consensus has beenreached. This process is then repeated until all theoptions have been dealt with. The blank Sheet 3should be copied as many times as there are optionsfor all the team members.

Using Sheets 4 and 5, the benefits of all the options areassembled as a series of scores alongside the list ofdecision criteria and supporting elements. Each scoremust have been multiplied by the weight of therespective objective (taken from Sheet 2 or 3) to reacha weighted score. The weighted scores are thencompared (Sheets 4 and 5). The highest weightedscore possible by any one option is 500, obtained by

7

In the case of English Heritage's conservationtreatment project, the following questions would beappropriate:• What if more serious problems are found in the

object?• What if the conservator suddenly becomes

unavailable?• What if the business fails?© What if a disaster occurs at the studio?• What if the project is delayed?• What if the project comes in over budget?

Assessing the Financial Impact of theOpt ionsAn assessment of the financial impact may be carriedout by the museum or by consultants with input fromthe museum. Depending on the nature and the scaleof the project, a quantity surveyor, a builder or otherspecialist service provider such as a conservator, couldbe asked to provide a simple estimate of work. Foranything more complex, expert advice may be neededfor the financial appraisal. Because of the variety andpotential complexity of financial analyses, only anoutline is provided here.

In the case of a facility such as a collection store, 'wholelife1 costs will include capital costs and a financialprojection over the life of the facility. They will take intoaccount the increase in running costs and maintenanceovertime while the facility is in use, any revenueincome and the varying rate of capital depreciation ofthe facility. The length of a projection will vary,depending on the type of project being appraised. Forexample, a new building might be appraised over a 50-year life span; a leasehold property, for the duration ofthe lease. Environmental control equipment might beassessed over a life of 10 to 25 years, depending on theequipment, while an exhibition installation might varyfrom a few months to a. number of years.

8 multiplying the total value of the aims, which is 100,with the maximum score that an option can achieve,which is 5. Therefore no consensus decision can rateany option higher than 500. The option with thehighest weighted score out of five hundred shouldprovide the museum with the greatest collection carebenefit. This completes the options appraisal.

3. Comparing the costs and benefits of theoptionsIf the exercise is continued as a cost/benefits appraisal,the weighted scores (or benefits) of each option arethen compared to the estimated costs on Sheet 6.How costings are obtained is described in the nextsection, Assessing the Financial Impact of the Options.The option which delivers the greatest benefit to themuseum at the lowest cost should emerge as thepreferred one. Nevertheless, as often happens, if acostly option emerges as the one likely to deliver thegreatest benefit, this appraisal could then make it easierfor a case to be made for its acceptance. This creates astrong and direct link between conservation planningand the strategic aims of the museum.

Finally, the selected option may be subjected to ananalysis of how robust the decision is when comparedto the other options which have been discarded. Thistest consists of a number of 'What if...?' questions,rehearsing changes in circumstances that could affectthe outcome. For example, in the case of WorcesterCity Museum Service's new collection store, thefollowing questions might be asked:• What if we find unexpected problems with the

building?• What if the building purchase price goes up?• What if there are delays in obtaining planning

consent?• What if the refurbishment cost and timetable

change?• What if we encounter problems with moving the

collection?• What if there are higher revenue costs than

anticipated?

Capital costs for building works should include anestimate of total building construction, fees andassociated costs, exhibition design and constructionand other fit out costs. Running costs should includemaintenance costs, the costs of utilities (water, gas, oil,electricity), any additional increase in staffing/staff timeand day-to-day costs (from cleaning to security) andany increase in curatorial activities such as ongoingenquiries, research, education and conservation.

If an appraisal is made of competing tenders foraconservation project, the likely length of time betweencycles of treatment should be considered as part of thefinancial projection over the life of the conservationwork, as it was in English Heritage's appraisal of theChiswick Tables. Due to the paucity of conservationdocumentation, however, there is scant historic dataon which to base predictions. It may be some timebefore assessments which seek optimal trade-offsbetween economic investment, and the benefits thatflow from them, can be applied to remedialconservation.

There are a number of standard economic appraisalmethods for assessing capital investment. Althoughpayback time is a crude measure of performance, it isthe simplest financial indicator that exists. It is the ratioof the initial cost to annual savings and as such does nottake into account the interest cost of the initial capital,nor any possible changes in future prices. However asan indicator, it is not significantly worse than otherindicators if the payback time is short, that is less thanfour years.

For collection care measures which are expected tolast for as long as possible, discounted cash flow may bea more suitable method. This method takes intoaccount the interest cost of the capital by discountingfuture savings back to the present at a predeterminedinterest rate. For a measure to be financiallyworthwhile, the discounted value of future savingsshould be larger than the initial cost. The longer thelifetime, the better are the chances for savings on thescheme.

Mortgage payback on the other hand, calculates the

additional mortgage necessary to finance the extra

capital investment, compared to savings in revenue

expenditure. If the annual saving in revenue

expenditure is greater than the repayment of the loan

(depending on the size of the loan, the percentage

interest and the period of the loan), the measure can

be deemed to be cost-effective. .

Ten steps in a cost /benef i ts appraisal:

1. Have a statement of purpose (o r f o rward

plan)

2. Develop key aims

3. Pr ior i t ise the key aims

4. Derive objectives (o r suppor t ing tasks)

5. Rank or 'weight ' the objectives

6. Decide on the opt ions

7. Cost the opt ions

8. Assess benefits of the opt ions th rough

the weighted scores

9. Compare the costs and benefits of

the opt ions

10. Check fo r uncertaint ies which might affect

the decision

9

10 Everyone involved has to be clear about the amount oftime a cost/benefits appraisal will take. Preparationtime will vary from museum to museum depending onhow complete the available documentation is and theawareness of the team of the issues to be discussed.Taking, for example, a cost/benefits appraisal ofproposed building improvements for collection care,the team leader will need to commission surveys andobtain reports and costings on the various options andthis may take from a few weeks to a few months toarrange. Once a shortlist of possible dates has beenagreed, the participants should be contacted to checktheir availability in case they have plans to be awayfrom work for any reason. It is important that teammembers are available for the whole exercise; theyshould be discouraged from committing themselves foronly part of the time.

The team members themselves will need time toreview all the necessary documents beforehand. Theyshould read the aims and objectives of the museum'sforward plan, look at the survey reports and get helpwith interpreting any related drawings if necessary. Ifthe building is unfamiliar, a site visit should be arrangedor, at the very least, recent and representativephotographs of the buildings should be available.At this stage, none of the costings should becommunicated to the team so that assessments of thesuitability of the proposed options can be made purelyon merit.

Parallel to these preparations, the team leader maydecide to involve a facilitator and to arrange a meeting.Not all cost/benefit appraisals will require the use of afacilitator, but there are distinct advantages to havingone. The role of the facilitator is explained more fully inthe next section. This meeting will give the team leaderthe opportunity to sound the facilitator out on anythingthat might be considered too ambitious and tofamiliarise the facilitator with the museum structure.Together they may need to extract the options fromthe surveys, reports etc. The number of options shouldcover all possibilities, but they must all be potentiallyrealisable.

How Long Will the Exercise Take?

If the museum does not have written objectivessupporting the aims, they will need to be teased out atthe preparatory stage by the team leader and facilitator,who should ensure that the number of variations arekept under control. A simple exercise can becomeunnecessarily complicated if the number of decisioncriteria and number of options run out of control.

How much time wil l be required for the exercise?A museum with six aims each with threesupporting objectives wil l have 18 decisioncriteriaIf five options are to be assessed against eachof the decision criteria, a total of 90variations wil l be discussedIf five minutes only is allocated to discusseach variation, a total of 7.5 hours wil l beneeded for the exercise, in other wordsa full day

This demonstrates the importance ofmaintaining control over the number of decisioncriteria and options. The discussion must betightly managed to avoid slippage.

Experience has shown that two days are needed forthe part of the exercise that is the options appraisal.On the first day, the aims and objectives of the forwardplan are discussed and weighted. It is sensible to allowa whole day because it gives time for adequatediscussion of elements on which some team membersmight be unclear. For example, a museum's aims andobjectives might be more familiar to some than toothers. Team members need to understand that theyshould come to the meeting with a clear idea of theircorporate aims. This part of the exercise will not needto be done again if other cost/benefits appraisals arecarried out, unless of course the aims and objectives ofthe forward plan change.

On the second day, which can be the following day or afew days later, the options appraisal described in theprevious section takes place. There is much to getthrough in one day. In the exercise both with EnglishHeritage and Worcester Museums Service, the lastelement, that is testing the robustness of the preferredoption, was not carried out on the same day. It was leftto the team leader to decide whether risk analysiswould be needed and if it was necessary to defend thepreferred option. A typical bar chart of the schedulemight be as follows:

* Note that the time allocated to 2b and 2c is notional and will vary widely depending on the typeand complexity of the options.

** This may be done immediately after the appraisal or at any time afterwards.

Appraisal Schedule

11

Who Should be Involved?

12 An options appraisal, though not a scientificallyaccurate approach to decision-making, is not a riskytechnique in itself if handled well. In fact, it can producepositive results beyond the subject under discussion.Staff who participated in the exercise expressed agreater sense of involvement in their organisation andincreased awareness of their role within it. Theorganisations involved were happy with the team-building opportunities it provided. But when all is saidand done, it is a tool which, like all others, must be usedjudiciously. An options appraisal will not, for example,resolve deep-seated conflicts.

The success of the exercise at Worcester MuseumsService and with the Collections Conservation team atEnglish Heritage was helped by the open approach tomanagement which already existed in bothorganisations. The question that a museum should askitself before deciding on such a process is whether theclimate in the museum is right for an options appraisal.

The checklist below, taken from W. Redman'sFacilitation Skills for Team Development, can be used to

decide whether an options appraisal is a valid processfor the museum.

Is the climate right?Management structure of the organisation isvery openManagement is very approachable and opento ideasAtmosphere of sharing good practicePeople are encouraged to learn fromeach otherManagement is supportiveTeam members are capable of doingtheir workTeam members are ready to developthemselvesPeople trust each other in the teamPeople are ready to express their views inthe teamTeam is ready to be challenged

Having decided to carry out a cost/benefits appraisal,the next important decision is who to involve. Thepoints of view of curators, conservators, collectionmanagers, marketing, finance and administration shouldall be represented. This allows a broad range of staff,particularly those who may only indirectly come incontact with the collection, the opportunity tocontribute in a direct way to decisions affecting thecollection. However, it is inadvisable to have morethan six to eight participants, and the exercise may notbe worth doing on this scale for modest decision-making.

An inclusive approach to collection caredecisions should ensure that:

The proposed improvements can be defendedby everyone, even if they are expensive,because they are seen to fulfil the museum'sforward planEveryone is involved in the decision-makingprocess, so that widespread support for thedecision is securedThe foundation is laid for a sustainablecollection care culture throughout themuseum

Whether a museum uses a facilitator or not dependson the number and complexity of the issues to bediscussed. A facilitator's role is to remain detachedfrom the contents of the discussion and to concentrateon the appraisal process itself. This is easier if thefacilitator is from outside the organisation. If so, he orshe will need to do some background work on themuseum to be clear about the purpose of the exerciseand to understand the team members participating inthe exercise. The facilitator should obtain a copy of thestaff structure of the museum. While it is the task of afacilitator to move the process on, it is also a functionof this role to make team members feel comfortableabout expressing their views. A facilitator shouldensure that everyone in the team, particularly those ata more junior level or those with a quiet or shypersonality, is contributing.

The facilitator should possess the following skills: theability to listen, to identify the issues, to maintaincontrol and yet clarify and deal with problems.Agreeing a set of rules with the team in advance ishelpful to everyone. A facilitator needs to retain theoverall picture and to be able to summarise individualteam members' contributions. Finally, it is the role ofthe facilitator to ensure that the goal is met and thatthe team reaches a consensus decision on the range ofpossible options before it. The facilitator will also beresponsible for the sealed envelope containing theestimate of cost of each option. When a consensusdecision on the preferred option is finally reached, thefacilitator can reveal the estimates so that a comparisonbetween costs and benefits can be carried out

Before the meeting, the facilitator should checkthat:

Relevant documents are available: forwardplan, reports, surveys etcForms for the exercise are preparedParticipants are provided with paper, pencils,rubbers and calculatorsA flip chart, pen and masking tape areavailableA photocopier is nearby

Case StudiesThe following two case studies demonstrate the use ofcost/benefit appraisals in conservation and collectioncare decisions. This subject is highly suited to such aprocess because of the high costs inherent in improvingpremises and facilities, the complexity of cost-effectiveconservation and collection care decisions, and thetime taken up in making the case to funding bodies ofthe need for investment in conservation and collectioncare.

These case studies will demonstrate that the questionsof what to do with a collection - which objects toconserve, how much and what to do to them and whois involved in the decision - are not simply a matter offinding a technical solution. The economic impact onthese organisations of the resources required for

conservation and collection care demanded that thedecisions should be made within an organisationalframework. Using a cost/benefits appraisal increasesstaff involvement in decision-making and fosters agreater understanding of the general direction in whichthe organisation is moving. Cost/benefits appraisals canalso be seen as a useful tool for demonstratingtransparency to funders, patrons and sponsors, giving aclear message that the organisation deserves support.

13

14

Case Study 1

15

How English Heritage Decided on anAppropriate Treatment for the Chiswick Tables

English Heritage's intention in carrying out a cost/benefits appraisal was to decide on the extent ofconservation treatment to be applied to two WilliamKent console tables recently purchased due to theiroriginal association with Chiswick House. Given thehigh value of the tables and the potential high cost ofconservation treatment, English Heritage intended tosubmit an application to the Heritage Lottery Fund forfinancial support. The Collection Conservation teamfelt that a cost/benefits appraisal could improve itschance of success in obtaining internal and externalsupport for the conservation programme. EnglishHeritage was subsequently awarded 75% funding forthe conservation of the Chiswick Tables by theHeritage Lottery Fund.

One of the pair of William Kent Console Tables c1730

The following description is an extract from the EnglishHeritage application to the Heritage Lottery Funddescribing the cost benefit appraisal.

Predicted benefits from completion of the project- short, medium and long-term benefits

1. Cost/benefits AppraisalThe cost/benefits options for conservation of thetables were formally assessed by piloting acost/benefit appraisal method devised by MayCassar, the Museums & Galleries Commission'sEnvironmental Adviser. The purpose of theappraisal model is to test the options for anyparticular decisions against the corporate

objectives of the institution. It appears to allow forthe quantifying of quality assessments, so that thebenefits of any particular decision are not assessedsolely in terms of cost.

2. Our application of the model was facilitated byMay Cassar, and the process will be published bythe MGC as a case study. A group of peoplerepresenting not only curatorial and conservationinterests but also the wider constituency ofregional and central users was drawn together toapply the model. Together they formed theProject Team:

Laura Drysdale, Head of CollectionsConservation (Project Manager);Julius Bryant, Director of Museums andCollections;Dave Gribbin, Senior Conservator, EaselPaintings Conservation;Treve Rosoman, Curator, Historic PropertiesLondon Region;Victoria Boyce, Deputy Finance andPlanning Manager, HP London Region;Steven Lovegrove, Site Manager SW LondonSites, HP London Region,

3. The Decision CriteriaThe Decision Criteria adopted by the group usedthe headings of the EH Corporate Plan1996-2000 and the Supporting Elements reflectthe sub-headings employed in the plan (whereapplicable). The Decision Criteria were weightedout of 100 according to the relative importance weascribed to them in relation to the conservation ofthe Chiswick Tables. These weightings were thenbroken down between the Supporting Elements ofeach Decision Criterion (see Table 1).

17

DECISIONCRITERION1. CONSERVING

2. ENRICHING

3. BRAINS ANDSKILLS

4. CHAMPIONING

5. FUNDING

6. QUALITY OFSERVICE

Total

SUPPORTING ELEMENT

1. Stable while on display

2. Not requiring major remedialconservation for 100 years

1. Enrich visitor experience of theTables2. Enrich visitor experience ofChiswick House3. Consistent with the appearance ofChiswick House4. Educating and publishing

1. Enhance academic knowledgeof the tables2. Applying and developingconservation skills

1. Raising awareness of ChiswickHouse2. Raising awareness of this aspect ofEH'S work

1. Value for money

2. Maximising funding

3. Maximising earned income

1. Exemplary standards of assessmentand treatment2. Project management skills

WEIGHTING(100)25

20

10

20

15

10

100

DISTRIBUTION(100)

15

10

4

7

5

4

4

6

8

12

6

5

4

5

5

100

18 Table 1 - Decision Criteria for Conservation of the Chiswick Tables

4. The Options for ConservationSix options were identified, as follows:1. Leave on display and implement preventive

conservation strategy;2. Re-gild the existing surface;3. Minimum intervention - stabilise the structure

and gilding;4. Remove some over-layers to reveal an earlier

over-layer, repair structure and retouch;5. Strip the existing gilding off, repair the structure

and re-gild;6. Relocate off-site and replicate.

The process of assessing which option best meetsthe established objectives runs as follows. Eachoption is matched with the Decision Criteria andgiven a score between one and five. One meansthat the option does not meet the requirements ofthe Decision Criterion, five means that therequirements are fully met. These scores are thenmultiplied by the weightings, giving each option afinal score out of a maximum 500 points(i.e. 5 score x 100 weighting). The option with thehighest score should provide us with the greatestquantified benefit (see Table 2).

An estimated cost for each option is thenestablished, and the option which delivers thegreatest benefit at the lowest cost emerges(see Table 3).

5. The Selected OptionThe selected option, a decision confirmed by theEH's Museums and Collections AdvisoryCommittee and Historic Properties ManagementBoard, was to remove some over-layers to revealan earlier over-layer, to repair the structure andretouch. Although this option is not the lowest-cost option, it does appear to offer the greatestbenefits for the lowest risk, and the cost is not sohigh as to compromise this advantage. This optionwas the basis for our specification to tenderers.

Detail of Overpainted Caryatid and Swag on William Kent Table

X-ray showing crisper definition of carving beneath overpainting

19

Table 2 - Comparing the Weighted Scores of all OptionsMuseums & Galleries Commission - English Heritage Cost/benefits Appraisal PilotTHE WEIGHTED SCORE OF EACH OPTION IS DECIDED BY MULTIPLYING THE WEIGHTING OF EACH SUPPORTING ELEMENT BY THE SCOREOF EACH OPTION. THE OPTION WITH THE HIGHEST WEIGHTED SCORE IS THE OPTION WHICH SHOULD PROVIDE THE GREATESTOVERALL BENEFIT TO ENGLISH HERITAGE

20

Table 3: Final AppraisalMuseums & Galleries Commission - English Heritage Cost/benefits Appraisal Pilot

OPTIONS APPRAISAL

0.1 Leave on display and implementpreventive conservation strategy

0.2 Re-gild the existing surface

0.3 Minimum intervention; stabilisethe gilding and structure

0.4 Remove some over-layers to revealan earlier over-layer, repairstructure and retouch

0.5 Strip, repair structure and re-gild

0.6 Relocate off-site and replicate

ESTIMATEDCOST

£2,500(£500 x 5 over100 years)£12,000(£6,000 x 2)£48,000(£4,000x2 +£40,000)£60,000(£30,000x2)

£90,000(£45,000x2)£100,000(£30,000x2 +£40,000)

WEIGHTED SCORE(FROM 500)

199

227

275

410

274

292

PREFERREDCHOICE

6th

5th

3rd

1st

4th

2nd

6. Benefits of the Conservation TreatmentThe benefits of conservation treatment aresummarised as follows.

Short-termWill generate some publicity.

; Achieves the primary aim of preserving the tablesfor the long-term benefit of the nation.

Medium-termMay support identification and acquisition, on loanor by purchase, of other original furniture - themore complete an interior looks, the more likely itis to attract interest

In conjunction with plans for refurbishing ChiswickHouse will raise the site's impact to match itsimportance, improving its profile nationally andinternationally, increasing visitor numbers andmaximising its potential for all forms of incomegeneration.

The London Borough of Hounslow regardsChiswick House as central to its tourist

development strategy, with increased visitor figuresand investment producing direct and indirectbenefits to the local economy. This project fits intothat vision.

The conservation programme will be a benchmarkproject for treatment of other furniture anddecorative fittings from Chiswick House.As a model project that will be widely publicised inthe professional conservation field, it willencourage good practice in examination andanalysis, project management, treatment andcommunication.

Long-termConservation of the tables will enrich visitorexperience of Chiswick House and all its contents.

Provides a better understanding of masterpieces ofKentian furniture, and of the importance of theinterior decor of Chiswick House. The projectensures that the tables will not require furtherremedial conservation for the next 100 years(in normal circumstances).

21

22

Case Study 2

23

How Worcester City Museum Service Decided onSuitable Premises to Re-house its ReserveCollection

In 1995, Worcester City Museum Sen/icecommissioned a survey of its reserve collections. Themain recommendation of the report was that if themuseums were to meet the objectives of their forwardplan, the collections had to be re-housed.

The challenge facing the museums was how to fulfil thisrecommendation, in the face of a squeeze on localgovernment expenditure. Worcester City Museumsand Art Galleries compete with Community Leisure,Tourism, Parks and Open Spaces, Sports Centres andthe Racecourse for funding. The museum had beenoffered a number of buildings of variable quality in andaround Worcester, including a standard factory unit, anexisting building adjacent to the museum in ForegateStreet, a Severn Trent waterworks building and ahistoric building known as the Infirmary in Castle Street.A new building was also considered.

The report on the cost/benefits appraisal whichfollows was presented by the Director of LeisureServices of Worcester City Council to the ChiefOfficers' Management Team in November 1997.It summarises the discussions and conclusions oftwo cost/benefits appraisals (items 1 to 5 anditems 6 to 10) and the summary andrecommendations of the Director of LeisureServices (items 11 and 12).

Subject: A New Museum for Worcester1. Purpose of the ReportI.I To set out the options for re-housing and

display of the collections of Worcester CityMuseum Service.

2. Background2.1 The citizens of Worcester have enjoyed

what museums have to offer since the1830s. For over a century the museumservice in Worcester has operatedfrom a purpose-built building currentlyshared with the County Council.

2.2 The City Museum Service has extended itsoperations into three timber-framedbuildings since the 1970s-theCommandery, the Museum of Local Life atTudor House, and Queen Elizabeth House.Two are historical museums open to thepublic. The service also makes use of twobuildings for storage, at Perdiswell andHylton Road.

2.3 The pressure for space within the CityMuseum and Art Gallery has become moreintense in recent years, due to a number offactors.

2.4 Among these factors are:2.4.1 Increased Specialisation of Displays

The tendency in recent years has been todispense with comprehensive displays ofmuseum objects in favour of thematicapproaches. The Commandery has beendeveloped as a home for a single themedisplay on a number of local history objectsin storage. A significant portion of the CityMuseum and Art Gallery is now given overto the collection of the WorcestershireYeomanry Cavalry and WorcestershireRegiment. As a result, important themes inthe history of the City are not represented.

2.4.2 Development of the City Art GalleryThe City Art Gallery now has two dedicatedexhibition galleries which provide a high-quality programme of regional importance.While this does not exclude the display ofthe historical collection of fine art, theopportunity to exhibit our own material hasbecome more limited.

2.4.3 Visitor NeedsThe requirements of visitors, and the need totarget specific sections of the community,have also reduced space for the permanentcollections in display and storage. Examplesinclude the loss of galleries to make room forthe installation of lift and toilets at the CityMuseum, and more recently, the creation ofan activity space for young children.

25

26 3. Assessing the Options3.1 Considerable work has already been

invested in an extensive audit of the storagesituation (1995) and a feasibility study ofproposed stores (1997). Both studies byexternal consultants provided a frameworkfor a cost/benefit analysis conducted bymuseum staff in May 1997.

3.2 The appraisal used a new model developedby the Museums & Galleries Commission'sEnvironmental Adviser, against a series ofoptions designed to improve the care ofmuseum collections.

3.3 The starting point for the cost/benefitsappraisal was to identify six options fortesting, all of which are included within themuseum forward plan as potential solutionsto the problems of storage of collections.These options are as follows:

3.3.1 Castle Street Infirmary SiteLarge complex of 18th, 19th and 20thcentury hospital buildings. The main 18thcentury building is listed Grade II and offersvarious gallery and storage possibilities inwards and existing storage or utility areas.Other buildings on site could be cleared orredeveloped for multi-purpose uses. Citycentre location with St Clement's Gateredevelopment area. Adjacent to roads andfacilities, eg racecourse, theatre, station, carparks, etc.

3.3.2 Trading EstateProbably a late 20th century building built forwarehouse or light industrial use. Could beoutside city centre but likely to be on amultiple-use site. More recent tradingestates on edge of city. Small amount ofoffice space, usually on-site.

3.3.3 New Collection StoreCompletely new facility tailored to meetrequirements of museum storage needs andwith opportunities to develop galleries orpublic access. Space and costs would suggestan edge-of-town/out-of-town location.

3.3.4 Foregate Street SiteListed Grade II museum/library building -19th and early 20th century. Developexisting galleries and stores. Mainlybasement storage. City centre location.Restricted car parking and access.

3.3.5 Foregate Street LibraryAs above, but expansion into Librarypremises only.

Foregate Street site, Worcester

Castle Street Infirmary Building, Worcester

3.3.6 Severn Trent Waterworks Building

W a t e r w o r k s bu i ld ing available f o r s torage.

N i n e t e e n t h century , o f h istor ic in terest b u t

unl is ted. C lose to r iver i n area p r o n e to

f l ood ing . R e m a i n d e r o f site t o t ake

resident ia l d e v e l o p m e n t . Subu rban loca t ion ,

b u t w i t h i n wa lk ing d is tance o f ci ty cen t re .

Bui ld ing an e m p t y shell f o r convers ion , b u t

w i t h o n e w i n g re ta ined b y Severn T r e n t

Possibil it ies f o r l im i ted on-s i te expans ion o f

facilit ies, b u t l i t t le o p p o r t u n i t y f o r publ ic

access.

Severn Trent Waterworks Building, Worcester

3.4 These o p t i o n s w e r e t h e n assessed against 24

key act ivi t ies w h i c h w e r e inc luded w i t h i n t h e

eight ob jec t ives f o r t h e m u s e u m service:

3.4.1 To provide a stimulating, welcoming

a n d m e m o r a b l e e x p e r i e n c e f o r

e v e r y o n e w h o uses a n d c o n t r i b u t e s

1. Exhib i t ions and Display

2. V is i to r Services

3. Access

3.4.2 T o enhance t h e p o t e n t i a l o f c o l l e c t i o n s ,

i n f o r m a t i o n a n d s i t e s i n w a y s t h a t a r e

e d u c a t i o n a l , e n t e r t a i n i n g a n d f u n .

1. Loans

2. Educat ion P r o g r a m m e

3. Events

3.4.3 T o p r o m o t e t h e use o f t h e m u s e u m s

se rv i ce t o l oca l p e o p l e , espec ia l l y t h o s e

w h o d o n o t v i s i t a t p r e s e n t .

1. Out reach

2. Temporary Projects

3. Relevance

3.4.4 T o es tab l i sh a n d p r o m o t e e f f e c t i v e

a c q u i s i t i o n , d o c u m e n t a t i o n a n d

r e s e a r c h m e t h o d s t o s a f e g u a r d t h e

C i t y ' s h e r i t a g e .

1. Col lect ing and Disposing

2. Documenta t ion and Recording

3. Research

3.4.5 T o p r o v i d e t h e h i g h e s t poss ib l e

s t a n d a r d o f c a r e f o r c o l l e c t i o n s ,

b u i l d i n g s a n d i n f o r m a t i o n r e s o u r c e s .

1 Conservat ion

2. Col lect ions Management

3. Maintenance of Buildings

3.4 .6 T o s u p p o r t t h e s u s t a i n a b l e d e v e l o p m e n t

o f o t h e r m u s e u m s a n d agenc ies w h o

m a k e a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e C o u n c i l ' s

po l i c y .

1. Adv ice

2. Political Suppor t

3. P romot ion

3.4.7 T o m a x i m i s e i n c o m e f r o m p u b l i c a n d

p r i v a t e sou rces i n w a y s w h i c h a r e

c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e m u s e u m ' s p u r p o s e

a n d c o m m i t m e n t t o access.

1. Grants and Sponsorship

2. Trading (Retail and Services)

3. Market ing

3.4.8 T o o p e r a t e i n a n e f f e c t i v e , e c o n o m i c

a n d a c c o u n t a b l e w a y .

1. Commun ica t ion

2. M a n a g e m e n t

3. Staff d e v e l o p m e n t

3.5 T h e e ight strategic ob jec t ives w e r e g iven a

rank ing and this percen tage score was t h e n

sub-d iv ided b e t w e e n t h e t h r e e activit ies.

Each o f t h e o p t i o n s was t h e n sco red against

these 2 4 cr i ter ia t o measure h o w

effect ively each o p t i o n w o u l d de l iver t h e

aims and ob jec t ives o f t h e f o r w a r d plan.

2 7

28 Museums & Galleries Commission - Worcester City Council Cost/benefits Appraisal Pilot

Summary Sheet of Agreed Division of Percentage of Task Supporting the Objectives

A.1A.2A.3B.1B.2B.3C.1C.2C.3D.1D.2D.3E.1E.2E.3F.1F.2F.3G.1G.2G.3H.1H.2H.3

EXHIBITIONS & DISPLAYSVISITOR SERVICESACCESSLOANSEDUCATION PROGRAMMEEVENTSOUTREACHTEMPORARY PROJECTSRELEVANCECOLLECTING AND DISPOSALDOCUMENTATION AND RECORDINGRESEARCHCONSERVATION (TREATMENTS)COLLECTIONS MANAGEMENTMAINTENANCE OF BUILDINGSADVICEPOLITICAL SUPPORTPROMOTIONGRANTS AND SPONSORSHIPTRADING (RETAIL AND SERVICES)MARKETINGCOMMUNICATIONSMANAGEMENT (& EVALUATION)STAFF DEVELOPMENT

767476438444255211424334100%

Comparing the Weighted Scores of Al l OptionsMuseums & Galleries Commission - Worcester City Council Cost/benefits Appraisal PilotTHE WEIGHTED SCORE OF EACH OPTION IS DECIDED BY MULTIPLYING THE WEIGHTING OF EACH SUPPORTING TASK BY THE SCORE OFEACH OPTION. THE OPTION WITH THE HIGHEST WEIGHTED SCORE IS THE OPTION WHICH SHOULD PROVIDE THE GREATEST OVERALLBENEFIT TO WORCESTER CITY COUNCIL

The highest score is 500, derived from multiplying the total weighting of the supporting tasks (which is 100) with the highest score (5) that can be achieved.

29

30 3.6 Six members of the section took part,together with Frances Halahan, theconservation consultant, who carried out theinitial storage review. Scoring was done onan individual basis, then a consensus wasreached following debate. The appraisal wasled by May Cassar, the MGC's EnvironmentalAdviser, who acted as facilitator.

3.7 This cost/benefit appraisal model is shortly tobe published by the Museums & GalleriesCommission for others to follow. The use ofthe options appraisal is now an importantcomponent of bids to the Heritage LotteryFund. The exercise was therefore anexcellent starting point for the strategicassessment of the options available.

3.8 The application of the cost benefit model ledto the following results:

OPTIONSDISCUSSED

Castle StreetTrading EstateBuildingNew StoreForegate Street(Victoria Institute)Foregate Street(Library)WaterworksBuilding

COST

£5 million +£620,000

£700,000£2.25 million

£750,000

£400,000

BENEFITSSCORE

(out of 500)

406280

356368

235

187

PRIORITY(according to

score)14

32

5

6

What would a Larger Central MuseumSite Offer?The City Council's forward plan for themuseum service accepted the need toconsider an expansion of the museumservice on a single site (and the closure ofother facilities if necessary). How could thespace be used and what benefits would itbring?

4.2 Visitor NeedsFacilities for familieseg - specific displays for children

- space for luggage, pushchairs- more interactive displays- improved cafe layout

Facilities for schoolseg - education rooms

- cloakrooms- wet and dry facilities- space for lunch- more displays linked to- National Curriculum

Facilities for groupseg - assembly areas

- lecture room- cloakrooms

Facilities for peoplewith disabilitieseg -seating

- less cluttered spaces- more multi-sensory displays- transfer spaces

Facilities for students and researcherseg - improved access to collections and

records- study areas

4.3 Exhibition Space- Increased gallery space would allow the

archaeology and history of Worcester tobe displayed in a more coherent andrepresentative way;

- Work with local communities could bedisplayed more quickly and effectively;

- Collections could be integrated with accessto digital archives, libraries and otherrecords;

- Material for the fine and decorative artcollections could be displayed moreregularly;

- More frequent shows of other media, egphotography/sculpture, would be possible;

- Other collections currently in store, eggeology, could be displayed more regularly.

4.4 StorageA review in 1995 identified the critical lack ofappropriate storage facilities available to themuseum service. There are currently 23different stores in six different places tomanage. A central facility with close links todisplays and/or its own public access istherefore a high priority in the forward plan.Increasing storage space within a centralmuseum building would:

4.4.1 Improve the care of a range of collectionsthrough better security, pest control,environmental conditions and accessgenerally.

4.4.2 Reduce damage to collections throughmovement between museums and theconsequences of storage in cluttered spacesas at present.

4.4.3 Allow the museum service to meetMuseums & Galleries Commission standardsfor the storage of collections.

4.4.4 Allow the museum service to meet EnglishHeritage standards for the storage ofarchaeological material.

4.4.5 Allow the public better access to the reservecollections.

4.4.6 Improve the range of temporary exhibitions.4.5 Working Environment

Opportunities for:- improved workshops;- better office environments;- reception areas for deliveries and

touring exhibitions;- storage areas for showcases and

equipment;- storage for shop stock;- pooling of staff resources generally.

5. How Much Space is Required?5.1 The following chart is an attempt to define

how much space would be required on acentral museum site, with the followingassumptions:

5.1.1 All museum stores would be housed on thesame site, with the exception of very large orheavy objects which would continue to behoused elsewhere.

5.1.2 All museum service officers would relocateto the central museum, except theCommandery manager and staff.

31

6.2 The proposal to relocate the entire library,museum and art gallery complex to theCornmarket adds another option forassessment. The option of relocating to theInfirmary without the benefit of an artsquarter also needs to be assessed. An initialattempt to evaluate these four options onthree distinct sites is made below.

5.3 Approximately one and a-half-times theexisting floor area at the City Museum andArt Gallery, subject to further analysis ofzoning and expansion rates for storage, isrequired.

6. The Next Stage6.1 The cost/benefit analysis has indicated a clear

priority for the direction of resources on afeasibility study.

32 5.2 AdditionalExisting Requirements TOTAL

(in square metres)Permanent Exhibition 300| 450 780Temporary Exhibition - Museums 55 50 105Temporary Exhibition - Art Gallery 135 100 235

490 600 1,120

Entrance/orientation 3 0 * 60 90Toilets 30 30 50Cloakroom 0 10 10Education Room 50 50 100Library 16 40 56Cafe 38 20 58Shop 15* 10 25

179 220 389

Storage of collections 180 470 650Study area/office 0 20 20Exhibition preparation 0 25 25Loading/unloading 0 20 20

780 535 715

. Offices 30 55 85Workshop 2 7 * 40 67StockroomStorage for supplies 27 100 127Storage for packing/materialsRest area 30 * 0 30

114 195 309

TOTALS 963 1,550 2,533| 195m2 occupied by Regimental Galleries* Shared 50:50 with County Council

33

A - BUY VICTORIA INSTITUTE AND EXTEND - LIBRARY MOVESB - MOVE TO CORNMARKET WITH LIBRARYC - MOVE TO INFIRMARY - STAND-ALONE OPTIOND - MOVE TO INFIRMARY - ARTS QUARTERE - LIBRARY MOVES - CONSTRUCT NEW STORE/RESOURCE CENTRE

* Score** Weighted Score

1Very Poor

2Poor

3Average

4Good

5Very Good

6.3 A summary of each site follows.

7. Option A - Buy Victoria Institute andExtend

7.1 Cost/benefit AnalysisThis option came second in the cost/benefitanalysis.

7.2 SpaceThe Victoria Institute is a large building on3-4 floors and divided into rooms to suit itseducational use both as a school and as a

branch of the Worcester College ofTechnology. The basement is partially belowground level.The building's floor area is approximately1250m , marginally larger than the existingCity Museum and Library, with a car park ofapproximately 160m2 fed by a drive fromSansome Walk.

7.3 AvailabilityThe building is currently on the market.

7.4 SecurityThe proximity of the existing museum andthe position adjacent to residential areasenhances the security of the site.

Access via the driveway and car park to, say,basement store may present an extra hazard.If a link was constructed between the twosites, care would need to be taken in theplanning of visitor flow and the number ofentrances and exits required.The relocation of material stored on theoutskirts of the city centre would improveresponse time for large parts of thecollection.

7.5 EnvironmentThere are signs of damp in the basementwhere collections are likely to be housed.Environmental control will be necessary inrooms with large windows on the northernside due to solar gain. Pollution problems arelikely, given the location.

7.6 Cost of AcquisitionPurchase price c.£270,000.

7.7 Cost of DevelopmentThe cost of redevelopment for a mix ofexhibition storage and service spaces hasbeen estimated at £2-2.5 million. A linkbuilding will be required to join the twobuildings.

7.8 ParkingThe site has space for staff and contractorparking for approximately 12 cars, subject tothe design of a link between the building inthis space.In view of its existing use and city centrelocation, no additional parking is likely to berequired on conversion to museum use.

7.9 Public TransportThe building will benefit from proximity toForegate Street rail station and existing busroutes. The creation of a 'museum stop' inthe bus lane on Foregate Street would be apriority. Access for coaches to unloadschoolchildren is easier on Sansome Walkand should be planned for as part of theredevelopment.

7.10 Proximity to ServicesThe building is located in a mixed-use area

with a combination of leisure (OdeonCinema, swimming pool), commercial(estate agents, insurance) and residentialareas (Arboretum, new residentialdevelopments on St Mary's Street and StMary's Church). The adjacent law courtshave just been upgraded.

7.11 Proximity to Shops

The main retail area is approximately1/4 mile away, although The Tything isincreasingly becoming a focus for antiqueshopping.

7.12 Proximity to other Arts FacilitiesThe nearest arts venue is Worcester ArtsWorkshop (also tentatively looking for newpremises?); the Odeon Cinema acts as amagnet for visitors in the evening and onSundays.

7.13 Visibility and ImpactThe building has an existing cultural use andis not likely to benefit from the 'new' imagethat relocation can bring. The creation of ahigh quality service link halfway alongTaylor's Lane could help to increase theimpact of the new site.

7.14 Tourism PotentialThe existing building attracts cultural touristsin sufficient numbers to suggest that a highquality exhibitions programme on a largerscale could add breadth to the existingofferings within the city. The art gallery inparticular is already attracting a regionalfollowing.The concepts developed for new exhibitionspaces must appeal to family audiences andchildren in order to promote Worcester as adestination for this target group.

7.15 Capacity for Increased VisitsWhile the building's location does notencourage the casual visitor, there isconsiderable potential for increasing visitsfrom school and college groups and fromfamily audiences.

34

A detailed market assessment needs to bemade to assess the impact of the loss oflibrary visitors and the positive benefits ofmixed use in parts of the building.

7.16 Catalyst for RedevelopmentThe impact of the new centre will depend onthe nature of the destination. There is anargument for developing other cultural useswithin the Victoria Institute complex, egstudios for artists, film theatre, to create amore rounded cultural centre. The creationof public rooms for the immediatecommunity would help to encourage localinvolvement in the life and work of themuseum and art gallery.The advantages of shared use need to beexplored as part of a feasibility study in viewof the size of the buildings available.

7.17 Funding OpportunitiesThe Victoria Institute offers possessionalongside the existing Museum and ArtGallery and therefore the opportunity forincremental development as fundraisingpermits. This is likely to be attractive to theHeritage Lottery Fund followingannouncements about the decline inavailable funding and the level of scrutinywhich is directed at large bids.

8. Option B - Move to the Cornmarketwith Library

8.1 Cost/benefit AnalysisThis option is not included in the forwardplan and no cost/benefit analysis has beencompleted.

8.2 SpaceThe Cornmarket is the former site ofWorcester's public hall, demolished in 1966.The car park on its site offers an area of

2approximately 1900m2 from St NicholasStreet to the Cornmarket. Planningconstraints on the site will dictate the natureof the building and the amount of spaceavailable for both functions.

8.3 AvailabilityThe car park is in City Council ownership.

8.4 SecurityThere is a range of options available in a newbuilding which can enhance the security ofcollections and this may overlap with therequirements of the reference library on thesame site.Loading and unloading of exhibits may behazardous unless properly planned in theoverall design.

8.5 EnvironmentTraffic pollution is a major issue on this sitebut it should be less expensive to achieve thestandards of environmental control requiredin a new building.

8.6 Cost of AcquisitionLoss of car park income is a key factor.

8.7 Cost of DevelopmentThe estimated cost of a new library on thesite, estimated by County officers, is£5 million for a building of 3,400m2. A newmuseum on a pro rata basis would cost£3.7 million, but could be as high as£7.5 million.

8.8 ParkingPressure on space may inhibit the retentionof any car parking on site and coach accesswill also be an issue. Extensive car parking isavailable on the opposite side of City WallsRoad.

8.9 Public TransportThe site is two minutes' walk from both thebus station and Foregate Street rail station.

8.10 The new building would be located on thefringe of the city centre, with pedestrianaccess along several routes from High Street.There are numerous restaurants, bars andsmall shops in adjacent New Street.

8.11 Proximity to ShopsThe retail area in Reindeer Court/TheShambles is approximately 50-100 metresaway with pedestrian access alongMealcheapen Street.

35

36 8.12 Proximity to other Arts FacilitiesThe joint use of a new building as alibrary/museum/gallery facility would help topromote the site as a destination for localresidents. Worcester Arts Workshop isnearby in Sansome Street; the Museum ofLocal Life and the Commandery is accessiblealong semi-pedestrianised streets; a numberof commercial galleries have opened inFriar Street.

8.13 Visibility and ImpactA building of high quality could have asubstantial effect on the townscape,obscuring the 1960s Co-Op building andcompleting the Cornmarket square.

8.14 The Corn market is close enough to theexisting tourism 'hot spots' to have anopportunity for attracting visitors along NewStreet and Friar Street. Its opportunity toattract tourists to it as a destination in its ownright may be hampered by a lack of space.

8.15 Capacity for Increased VisitsA new building is likely to have a positiveimpact on existing library/museum visitornumbers, at least for a three-to-five-yearperiod. Given the right concepts, it coulddevelop as a significant family attractionwithin the City Centre.

8.16 Catalyst for RedevelopmentThe site is arguably close enough toprominent retail sites to have only a marginaleffect on economic development. It couldcertainly support the economy in NewStreet and Friar Street, helping to sustain theshops and cafes in that area and thussupporting viable uses for the City's mosthistoric streets.

8.17 Funding OpportunitiesAny capital investment will rely heavily onfunding from the Heritage and Arts Lottery.At present the Lottery does not supportcapital investment in lending libraries,although specialist libraries and archives areincluded within the criteria. Separating the

museum and preservation functions from thelibrary functions within the capital projectwould be a complex task. There is also agrowing reluctance to fund new facilities, asLottery funds to existing distributorsdecrease, and the emphasis moves awayfrom bricks and mortar.

9. Option C/D - Move to Royal Infirmary9.1 Cost/benefit Analysis

This option came first in the cost/benefitanalysis.

9.2 SpaceThe Infirmary is an 18th century brick-builtbuilding, on four floors, with 19th and 20thcentury additions on a large site which is stilla functioning hospital.For the purposes of this survey, it is assumedthat the museum and art gallery will occupythe historic core, including the chapel. Thefootprint measures approximately 1600m ,excluding single storey extensions and thereis an external courtyard to the front of thebuilding accessible from Infirmary Walk.

9.3 AvailabilitySubject to progress on the construction ofthe new hospital at Newtown - within threeyears.

9.4 SecurityThe layout of the hospital offers theopportunity to control access to a range ofgalleries occupying the existing wards in eachwing. Substantial alterations would berequired including the demolition of 1930swards which provide access to the rear ofthe building.

9.5 EnvironmentBasement storage is likely to suffer fromdamp, but as yet no survey has been done.It is possible that the fabric would provideadequate insulation. Maintenance costs arelikely to be high.

9.6 Cost of AcquisitionThe Regional Health Authority put the valueof the whole site at £3 million in 1995.

9.7 Cost of DevelopmentThe cost of redevelopment has beenestimated at £2 million plus. It is likely thatservices will need replacing althoughprovision for goods access (large lift shaftsetc) has already been made due to its currentuse.

9.8 ParkingThe site is close to large car parks atPitchcroft and a designated coach park atCroft Road. It should be possible to createsome dedicated parking and drop-off pointsas part of the St Clement's Gate design.

9.9 Public TransportReasonable links to the bus and rail stationscould be improved by upgrading along therailway arches route and developing alongThe Butts.

9.10 Proximity to ServicesDependent on the nature of St Clement'sGate and its final 'mix'.

9.11 Proximity to ShopsAt some distance now from the retail centrebut could change - see 8.10.

9.12 Proximity to other Arts FacilitiesWithin the City the Museum, Art Gallery,Library, Record Office and Theatre areactively considering relocation due to therestrictions of their existing sites. Investmentin cinema facilities by private developers isalso underway.A vision has been presented of a new'cultural triangle' on the St Clement's Gatesite. This brings all these facilities togetherand helps to create a vibrant part of the City,linked by a park to the River Severn, whichhas both a daytime, night-time and weekendeconomy which would benefit all facilities.

9.13 Visibility and ImpactPotentially a high profile site with views overPitchcroft and the River Severn. The

strategic impact of pooling arts facilitiesneeds detailed examination.

9.14 Tourism PotentialThe site is well placed and large enough toencourage half or full day visits as adestination in its own right. There are alsoopportunities to create attractiveenvironments in open space around thebuilding linked by walkways to the riverside.

9.15 Capacity for Increased VisitsCould be variable depending on the natureof surrounding development. There iscertainly scope for increasing coach partybookings and school visits.

10. Opt ion £ - Construction of NewStore/Resource Centre

10.1 Cost/benefit AnalysisThis option came third in priority in thecost/benefit analysis.

10.2 SpaceThis option would involve the constructionof a new store with public access as a coreobjective within the brief. The collectionswill include social history displaced from theMuseum of Local Life and the contents ofexisting stores at Perdiswell and HyltonRoad.

10.3 AvailabilitySubject to identification of a suitable sitewithin reasonable distance of museums.

10.4 SecurityIt would be possible to include appropriatesecurity measures within a new building;selecting the right location is an importantfactor alongside physical and electronicbarriers.

10.5 EnvironmentThis option covers the most cost effectiveand energy efficient option for themaintenance of appropriate environmentalcontrols. Sensitive collections can be housedin smaller units within the structure toachieve tighter control. The degree of

37

38 accessibility for visitors needs to be definedat an early stage.

10.6 Cost of AcquisitionSubject to selection of site.

10.7 Cost of Developmentc£600,000.

10.8 ParkingSome parking and access for coach parties isrequired if the store is to function as a publicresource centre.

10.9 Public TransportSubject to selection of site.

10.10 Proximity to ServicesSubject to selection of site.

10.11 Proximity to ShopsUnlikely to be close, given land values.

10.12 Proximity to Arts FacilitiesSubject to selection of site.

10.13 Visibility and ImpactSubject to selection of site and design.

10.14 Tourism PotentialThe store/resource centre is unlikely to offerany capacity to promote tourism.

10.15 Capacity for Increased VisitsCould be substantial, given the increase inaccessibility to reserve collections which arecurrently in stores barely accessible tomembers of staff. Educational visits fromschools and colleges will benefit the most.

11. Summary and Recommendations11.1 This report attempts to set out the issues

involved in the consideration of four coursesof action.

11.1.1 To take the opportunity to purchase theremainder of the Victoria Institute now andin the longer term to extend the Museumand Art Gallery on its existing site.

11.1.2 To work with the County Council on a newLibrary, Museum and Art Gallery on theCornmarket.

11.1.3 To move the Museum and Art Gallery to theCastle Street Infirmary, with or without otherarts facilities.

11.1.4 To construct a new store to solve theimmediate crisis facing the collections,pending the move of the Library to theCommarket when opportunities for newdisplays will become available.

11.2 The revenue implications of these optionshave not been evaluated due to lack of time.Given the complexity of issues in thedevelopment of a new facility, analysis needsto be directed at a single option.

11.3 The capital costs have been developed withassistance from Technical Services and figuressupplied by the Museums & GalleriesCommission. They are given as generalguidance only.

11.4 It should also be stated that no work had yetbeen done on the concepts for a newmuseum - these can have a substantialimpact on development costs.

11.5 The options have been appraised against thestated objectives of the City Council for itsmuseum service with the assistance of thecost/benefit analysis method developed bythe Museums & Galleries Commission.

12. Recommendation:

Chief Officers' Management Team isasked to consider a response to theoptions above.

Photocopy Masters

SHEET 1: WEIGHTING OF DECISIONCRITERIAUsing this sheet, each team member considers eachaim or decision criterion, however many, and gives apersonal ranking. Following discussion, a final weight isgiven to each one as a percentage of all the others.This establishes the relative importance of each aim ordecision criterion (out of 100). This in turn decides thesub-total value of each group of objectives orsupporting elements.

SHEET 2: WEIGHTING OF SUPPORTINGELEMENTSEach aim or decision criterion is fulfilled by a number ofsupporting objectives or supporting elements. Usingone sheet for every aim, its sub-total value is used toestablish the relative importance, or weighting, of eachobjective. First a personal ranking is given, followed bydiscussion to reach an agreed weighting. The blankform should be copied so that there is one for each aimand enough sets for every team member. The sameexercise is carried out until all the objectives have beendiscussed and weighted.

SHEET 3: SCORING EACH OPTIONUsing one sheet for every option, each option is scoredfrom 1 (low) to 5 (high), against all the objectives inorder to decide how well each option fulfils eachobjective. First a personal ranking is given, followed bydiscussion to reach an agreed score. The weightings ofthe objectives are multiplied by the agreed scores togive weighted scores. These are then added to givethe final weighted score of the option. The blank formshould be copied so that there is one for each optionand enough sets for every team member. The sameexercise is carried until all the options have beendiscussed and scored.

SHEETS 4 A N D 5: COMPARING THEWEIGHTED SCORE OF ALL OPTIONSUsing these sheets, the weighting of the objectives, thescores, the weighted scores and the final totals can beplotted to enable easy comparison of the options orfor presentation of the results of the appraisal. By

comparing the weighted score of each option with thehighest weighted score possible, that is 500, the optionwith the highest weighted score is the one whichshould provide the greatest benefit to the museum.

SHEET 6: FINAL APPRAISALUsing this sheet, the weighted scores of each optionand their respective estimated costs can be compared.This allows the preferred choice based on both costand benefits to emerge.

39

40 Museums & Galleries Commission Cost/benefits Appraisal

SHEET 1: WEIGHTING OF DECISION CRITERIA

DISCUSS EACH CRITERION AND DECIDE THEIR RELATIVE IMPORTANCE TO EACH OTHER BYWEIGHTING THEM OUT OF 100

Museums & Galleries Commission Cost/benefits Appraisal

SHEET 2: WEIGHTING OF SUPPORTING ELEMENTS

TAKE A DECISION CRITERION * AND ITS PERCENTAGE WEIGHT ** FROM THE PREVIOUS SHEET ANDDECIDE THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF EACH SUPPORTING ELEMENT AS A PERCENTAGE OF THEWEIGHT OF THE DECISION CRITERION

41

42 Museums & Galleries Commission Cost/benefits Appraisal

SHEET 3: SCORING EACH OPTION

DECIDE HOW WELL EACH OPTION FULFILS EACH SUPPORTING ELEMENT BY SCORINGFROM 1 (LOW) TO 5 (HIGH)

Museums & Galleries Commission Cost/benefits AppraisalSHEET 4: COMPARING THE WEIGHTED SCORES OF ALL OPTIONSTHE WEIGHTED SCORE OF EACH OPTION IS DECIDED BY MULTIPLYING THE WEIGHTING OF EACH SUPPORTING ELEMENT BY THE SCOREOF EACH OPTION. THE OPTION WITH THE HIGHEST WEIGHTED SCORE IS THE OPTION WHICH SHOULD PROVIDE THE GREATESTOVERALL BENEFIT TO THE ORGANISATION

The highest score possible is 500 derived from multiplying the total weighting of the supporting elements, which is 100, withthe highest score (5) that can be achieved.

43

SHEET 5: COMPARING THE WEIGHTED SCORES OF ALL OPTIONS (CONTINUATION)

The highest score possible is 500 derived from multiplying the total weighting of the supporting elements, which is 100, with the highest score (5)that can be achieved.

44

Museums & Galleries Commission Cost/benefits Appraisal

SHEET 6: FINAL APPRAISAL

45

References

46 Ashley-Smith, J., 1996. Editorial. V&A ConservationJournal, No. 18.

Cassar, M., 1995. Environmental Management: Guidelinesfor Museums and Galleries. Museums & GalleriesCommission with Routledge.

Criegh-Tyte, S., Daffern, P., Davies M. & Siddorn G.,1996. Options Appraisal of Expenditure Decisions:A Guidefor the Department of National Heritage and its Non-Departmental Public Bodies.

Davies, S., 1996. Producing A Forward Plan,MGGGuidelines for Good Practice. Museums & GalleriesCommission.

Department for Culture, Media and Sport (formerlyDNH), 1996. Treasures in Trust, A Review of MuseumPolicy. DNHJO 168NJ.

Heritage Lottery Fund, 1997. How to Write a BusinessPlan.

H.M.Treasury, 1993. The Economic Appraisal of PropertyOptions:A Manual of Procedures and Techniques.

La Rocca, E. & Nardi, R., 1995. Preventive Conservationand Restoration:A Matter of Costs. IIC PreventiveConservation: Theory and Practice, Ottawa.

Museums & Galleries Commission, 1995. RegistrationGuidelines. Registration Scheme for Museums andGalleries in the United Kingdom.

Puglia, S., 1995. Cost-Benefit Analysis for B/W Acetate:Cool Storage vs. Duplication. Abbey Newsletter, V 19,No.4.

Redman, W., 1996. Facilitation Skills for TeamDevelopment. Kogan Page Ltd.

Staniforth, S., 1990. Benefits Versus Costs inEnvironmental Control. Managing Conservation, ed.S.Keene, UKIG

47

48