MAINTENANCE CARE IN THE SMALL MUSEUM

By Larry L. Nelson

Local History Notebook, May / June 1986

Much of a museum's interpretive programming would seem to be the stuff of a Hollywood press agent's dreams. Exotic and expensive objects, intriguing exhibits, exciting battle re-enactments, the artistic achievement of skilled traditional artisans, and the prestige of accomplished scholars who participate in lectures and seminars on the museum's behalf are elements that can lend an aura of glamour reminiscent of a Hollywood opening to a museum's public image.

Whatever the perception, however, successful museum management, whether it involves the opening of a high visibility "blockbuster” exhibit, or the guiding of a school tour, requires the careful completion of prosaic tasks decidedly lacking the sparkle and glitter of Tinseltown. Thoughtful planning, attention to detail, and a respectful regard for the basics are at the heart of competent historical organization administration.

Of all the tasks confronting the museum, common custodial care and routine building and grounds maintenance would seem to be the most mundane and ordinary. Yet the maintenance and custodial operations of a museum play an important role in the historic site's educational programming. Maintenance care provides the necessary support services allowing virtually all areas of the museum to operate efficiently, comfortably, and safely.

Responsibility of Maintenance Care

In many small museums, maintenance care is the responsibility of either a small paid staff or a cadre of volunteers who must care for the appearance of the site's grounds and buildings. This responsibility includes both routine custodial care and periodic maintenance services, physical plant operations, such as temperature and humidity control, electrical, water, sewage, security systems, and landscaping duties. In addition, effective maintenance support is needed to prepare for special events, assist in the installation of exhibits, and, occasionally, to take an active part in the interpretive process.

The maintenance of an historic site, however, entails much more than common custodial work. The very nature of a museum demands that the staff involved in maintenance care is in daily contact with objects that, because of rarity and historic associations, are valuable and perhaps irreplaceable. The visitation in the museum means that much of what is involved in maintenance care is held up to public as well as private scrutiny.

Complicating matters, the museum staff is confronted with what appears to be a fundamental contradiction, namely that the very act of cleaning an object or structure can contribute to its deterioration and ultimately to its destruction. Solvents, abrasives, excessive moisture, and dryness, while all part and parcel of the cleaning process, are also hazards that can lead to unnecessary damage. Likewise, improper handling, vigorous rubbing, scrubbing, and even careless moving can accelerate wear and lead to breakage. Nonetheless, the decision not to clean can be equally detrimental. Dirt is abrasive, and impurities in the air may adversely affect leather, paper, and textiles. Microscopic organisms, insects, and vermin may also infest the buildings. Lastly, a soiled and run-down museum presents an unhealthy and unsafe environment to which even the most forgiving of visitors must soon object. The museum staff, then, should be sensitive to the very real, special demands of maintenance work in a museum, and must be prepared to balance the competing, often contradictory realities of site and object care.

Small museums with limited funding and a mostly volunteer staff seem to be particularly vulnerable to the inherent conflicts of museum maintenance care. A workable compromise, however, is possible even in the most modest of historical organizations. The keys are effective organization, communication, and supervision.

In larger museums, the responsibility for object care, artifact and structural conservation, and building maintenance may be split or delegated to specific individuals, departments, or divisions. In small institutions, however, these responsibilities are often shared by a small group of individuals, or, indeed, one person. Whether working with a division or an individual, though, the museum director must clearly organize the staff, explicitly delineating specific areas of responsibility and lines of authority. If funding for custodial staff is available, the director may only have to hire and train the necessary personnel. In smaller institutions, though, the director must turn to his or her volunteer corps. Volunteers may be organized into a committee, or specific volunteers may simply be delegated to oversee maintenance operations.

In small museums, for example, the re-roofing of an historic structure will unavoidably lead to the loss of a certain amount of historic architectural fabric; the polishing of silverware will remove traces of the object's surface; and the polishing and dusting of furniture may deposit chemicals upon the wooden surface that, over time, may discolor the piece, lift veneer, and contribute to the loss of carved detail.

Importance of Communication

Once the director has organized the staff, he or she must encourage communication. Each and every member of the staff must be made aware of the museum's unique role and purpose. When the completion of even the most mundane of tasks can lead to far-reaching and irreversible consequences for the institution's structures and artifacts, it is imperative that all personnel approach their assignments with the museum's ultimate mission clearly in mind.

To begin the process of communication, the director should first formalize policies and procedures, place them in writing, and then distribute the document to everyone involved either in the care of an object or the environment in which the object is to be placed. The document should be sufficiently broad to address the major objectives of the museum and should note how the maintenance program will contribute to those objectives.

Though the specific contents of the document will vary from institution to institution, the document should reiterate the museum's purpose statement, give a brief history of the structure and institution, and provide an overview of the scope of the museum's collections. The document should also list broad job descriptions of those involved in object or structure care, lines of authority, and emergency information for fire, police, and contractors such as plumbers and electricians. A complete guide to formulating such a document is found in J. Henry Chamber's Cyclical Maintenance for Historic Buildings under the section entitled "What to Include in the Maintenance Manual."

The development of this document should be a collaborative effort, involving the key personnel assigned to artifact and building care. Early, broad-based participation by the staff in forming the policy manual will ensure that a consensus of often divergent concerns can be reached, problem areas anticipated and addressed, and that a clear understanding of who does (and does not do) what, when, and under what circumstances can be achieved. Once the document is developed, it should be reviewed and approved by the museum's governing board.

Even the most well conceived and planned programs can go awry, however. The director must continue to encourage and solicit communication from the staff. If some aspect of the museum's maintenance schedule is not sufficiently comprehensive and allows certain needs of the museum to go neglected, then communication concerning the problem must be reciprocal, both from the staff to the director, and from the director to the staff.

Communication must not end at the museum walls. A wealth of pertinent information is to be found in a variety of professional literature. The most comprehensive treatment of historic site maintenance is found in Chamber's Cyclical Maintenance for Historic Buildings. The subject is also exhaustively covered in Ralph H. Lewis' Manual for Museum’s. Studies that address historic house care within the context of collections management include Per E. Guldbeck's The Care of Historical Collections: A Conservation Handbook for the Non-Specialist, and Robert McGiffin's Furniture Care and Conservation. In addition, three audio-visual presentations produced by the American Association for State and Local History, Curatorial Care: The Environment, Curatorial Care: Furniture, and Housekeeping Techniques for the Historic House provide useful information. All of these materials are available through the Ohio Historical Society's Local History Lending Library. It is important that the small museum director make every effort to have these books, pamphlets, and leaflets available for handy reference.

Likewise, the distributors and manufacturers of many of the products that are to be used in the maintenance program will provide, on request, detailed technical information on a product's chemical composition and the possible effects of the product on specific types of artifacts. If you are faced with the prospect of using a new, untried product or process, do not experiment. Experience can indeed be the best teacher, but often the tuition is too high.

Occasionally a maintenance problem will arise that is sufficiently complex to require outside expertise. Advice, sometimes for a fee, but often free for the asking, can be obtained from the staffs of regional and state historical agencies, local art museums, and from the Intermuseum Laboratory in Oberlin, Ohio.

Lastly, after the director has selected, trained, and assigned the tasks to staff, a maintenance schedule must be devised and work inspected. Effective supervision stands at the center of successful maintenance care.

Daily Maintenance Operations

In general, the daily maintenance operations of the museum will fall into one of three broad categories: daily policing (trash, litter, spills), routine maintenance (sweeping, mopping, grass cutting), and periodic maintenance (painting, roofing, equipment upkeep, such as filters, fluids, and lubrication). A schedule allowing for the smooth integration of all these types of tasks should be developed and implemented. The use of a simple appointment type calendar with space for notations may be the most common and efficient means of doing so.

In addition to scheduling the actual work, the necessary support materials allowing the work to proceed must be provided. Supplies must be ordered and stockpiled, and equipment must be maintained and repaired. A frequent inventory of custodial supplies should be an important part of the maintenance schedule. Likewise, the director should keep a detailed inventory of the museum's equipment, noting such pertinent information as date of purchase, serial number, vendor, warranty information, service contract specifications, and the source of replacement parts.

When supplies become diminished and equipment becomes worn out, they must be replaced. Here, however, another inherent contradiction in museum maintenance work becomes apparent. Supplies and equipment are expensive, as is the supervision of staff, whether it be paid or volunteer. Yet an effective maintenance program is essentially invisible. Indeed, it is only the omissions of such a program that will attract much notice.

Museum directors will find willing donors of artifacts and ready sponsors for special events, but rarely will they be fortunate enough to locate patrons willing to supply lawn mowers or floor-wax. The director must realize the seemingly inordinate commitment of funds that are necessary for the successful maintenance program to operate efficiently, and must likewise make every effort to convince the governing board to allocate the necessary financial support.

Volunteers selected for the maintenance of the museum and grounds should possess dependability, reliability, responsibility, excellent manual dexterity, and a willingness to follow direction. The staff should understand institutional policy, particularly that part which concerns itself with the treatment of historic materials, and be aware of correct procedures and specific task designation. The staff's work should be frequently inspected and periodically evaluated.

Certain circumstances will, at times, require a more broad-based assessment of the staff's strengths and limitations. Specific tasks, such as masonry cleaning and repointing, for example, may require a level of technical expertise not found in-house. Likewise, other tasks, such as insect and vermin extermination, are inherently dangerous. In cases such as these, the director should be prepared to contract with outside vendors who are proficient in these types of services.

To aid in organizing, scheduling, and evaluating the maintenance program, a series of simple forms for specific types of tasks (daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly tasks, for example) can be developed. The form may note if the task was completed or inspected, the amount of man-hours used, and supplies expended. A periodic review of the completed forms will provide information helpful in long-range planning, budgeting, personnel evaluation and scheduling, and may point to specific weaknesses of the program as a whole. A variety of these types of forms which can be either used as presented, or amended and adapted to the specific needs of your particular museum may be found in Chamber's Cyclical Maintenance for Historic Buildings.

Conclusion

The maintenance program of an historic site, then, is one of the fundamental building blocks of that museum's successful administration. Thoughtful planning, careful organization, and a sensitive application will provide the small museum with a maintenance schedule that promotes object and architectural conservation, enhances curatorial and interpretive objectives, and provides the public with an environment of safety and comfort.

Suggested Reading

The following suggested readings are available through the Local History Office Lending Library.

Chambers, J. Henry. Cyclical Maintenance for Historic Buildings. Washington D.C.: National Park Service, 1976.

Curatorial Care: Furniture. Nashville, Tennessee: American Association for State and Local History, 1977.

Fales, Mrs. Dean A., Jr. Technical Leaflet No. 40. "The Care of Antique Silver." Nashville, Tennessee: American Association for State and Local History, 1967.

Guldbeck, Per E. The Care of Antiques and Historical Collections. 2nd ed. Nashville, Tennessee: American Association for State and Local History, 1985.

Kitchen, Judith. Old-Building Owner's Manual. Columbus: The Ohio Historical Society, 1983.

Nylander, Jane C. Technical Leaflet No. 2. "Care of Textiles and Costumes: Cleaning and Storage Techniques." Nashville, Tennessee: American Association for State and Local History, 1970.

Peterson, Harold L. Technical Leaflet No. 10. "Conservation of Metals." Nashville, Tennessee: American Association for State and Local History, 1968.

Rottenberg, Barbara Lang. Technical Leaflet No. 127. "Care and Display of Glass Collections." Nashville, Tennessee: American Association for State and Local History, 1980.

Larry Nelson is the Site Manager of the Fort Meigs State Memorial in Perrysburg, Ohio. A faculty member of Dawes College, Bowling Green State University, the University of Toledo, and Defiance College, Mr. Nelson has published articles and reviews on military history and American decorative arts in journals such as Ohio History and Antiques Magazine. He is the author of Men of Patriotism, Courage, and Enterprise: Fort Meigs in the War of 1812.

The Local History Notebook is edited and published by the Ohio Historical Society's Local History Office, in order to bring useful information to persons working in the local history field. The selection of subjects and authors is based on inquiries to the Local History Office and on the editor's determination of issues which are timely in nature and lasting in scope. The reference inserts are copyrighted 1986 the Ohio Historical Society. Reprints are available; please specify volume and number. For information on prices, write to: