Kennedy, Edward M.

Pell, Claiborne

English

DigitalCommons@URI

University of Rhode IslandDigitalCommons@URIMuseum Services Act (1984) Education: National Endowment for the Arts andHumanities, Subject Files II (1962-1996)1983Museum Services Act (1984): Correspondence 10Edward M. KennedyClaiborne PellFollow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/pell_neh_II_45This Correspondence is brought to you for free and open access by the Education: National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities, Subject Files II(1962-1996) at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Museum Services Act (1984) by an authorized administrator ofDigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@etal.uri.edu.Recommended CitationKennedy, Edward M. and Pell, Claiborne, "Museum Services Act (1984): Correspondence 10" (1983). Museum Services Act (1984).Paper 11.http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/pell_neh_II_45/11http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/pell_neh_II_45/11EDWARD M. Ki;NNEDV MASSACHUSETTS Mr. Christopher DeMuth Administrat:Qr WA$HINC?TON, Q.C. ~9510 Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs New EJ<;ecutive Office Building Washingtonj D.C~ 20S03 Dea.r Mr. DeMtith: February 17, 1983 Senator Pell and I would like to express our deep concern regatding the proposed revision of the .Institute of i11useum Servi<;e$ regulations as· published irt the Feder~l kegtster, December 21, 1982. The$e propo~ed Ghanges would have a substantial impact on the museum community and therefo~~ merit careful consideration~ Eligibility fdt tMS awards would be signific•ntly altered in a nµmber of ways. Assistance from the Institute would be limited to 3 yeats in any~succcssivc 5 year perio<l. This inconsistenty in funding woµld re5ult in a decline in the quality and services of mu~eum programs and would establish an arbitrary selection proeess that would preclude consideration of applicants ofi the basis of merit. This represehts a sigrtifitifit change in ratignele for the IMS progtam4 The restricting of Chillertge grantee~ from applying for.IMS funds irt the same year overlooks the acknowledged difference~ among these fundifig sources. ~ach sgµrce ii a distinct and impottint resource for mu$eums. Should this restri~tion be adopted, many museums whieh have already been awarded Chall~nge grants would lose general operating suppo~t ffibfiies in fiscal 1983. Museums would also be in-eligible to apply for both general operating sµpport and spetial project monies in a single year under the ndw qualifications. The .omission in the ptoposed IMS regulations of a ~tated minim.um award for museums that r~port budgets uf1der $50,000 i~ bf great cQncern, a~ the majority of the ffiu~eum co~unity falls under this budget category. Also, the Board would ~eteive the authority to d~termine that funds awarded from IMS be matched with non~fedetal dollars contributed. to the museum for its im1llediately preceding year. Given the current economic state, museums, de~pite aggressive ftihdtaising, woµl<} be forced to substantially reduce or elimiriate pfograms tAthet than seek other economic sources. the new ..rulings would establish a str:i.Gter ~tppr<cHtch to the application process. Fiilute to submit ~equired information at the time df filing would subject an applicant to rejectiort on technical gtoufids without ·consideration on merits. C011Jpl.iance with this reg~latign woµld be partituia~iy difficult in view of another new provision requiring financial statements from applicants ~ho previou~ly teteived IMS funds. We recommend that final provisions reflect la.nguage in the House Al)'pTotn·:i at:i.on Cammi t tee report on FY 198 3 app.rQpria t ions that supports an ~ppeil process ihd application reconsideration. · Finally, we urge the rein~tat~ment 9:f the tMS Emerg(~ncy Grants progta1fi to ensure timely emergency ass:Lstanc~ :for ins ti tµtic;ms that experience catastrophic circumstances. It is our hope that the final regulations will reflect a return to former qualification guidelines and the orig:i6nal IMS intent of encouragement and assistance to the museum community. · Sincerely, 

Museum Services Act (1984): Correspondence 10

https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1028&amp;context=pell_neh_II_45

Museum Services Act (1984): Correspondence 10

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@URI