Museum professionals have delivered a mixed reaction to Arts Council England’s (ACE) ongoing Accreditation review.
The Accreditation scheme, which ACE says is undergoing a review to make it “more useful and user-friendly”, sets nationally agreed standards for museums in the UK.
The scheme was last reviewed in 2011, when it was updated to put more focus on visitors’ needs. The current review was announced in early 2017. The scheme is expected to be relaunched this autumn, when museums will be expected to provide evidence they meet Accreditation requirements, which for some comes later than expected.
Claire Browne, the chair of the National Museum Development Network, says: “They have gone deeper than they originally anticipated. The problems with the scheme had become broader than they originally thought.”
One museum professional surveyed by ACE regarding Accreditation says “it was one of the most important things to have happened within British museums”, while another claims it has “lost its way”.
Thorough consultation
Browne adds: “What is good is that they have consulted very thoroughly with the sector and have scrutinised all sides of it, both internally and externally.
“The next stage is to win people back a little bit and communicate the changes,so that people aren’t fearful. The review will bring positive changes, but there is some entrenched negativity because the things that were going wrong with the scheme were going wrong for a number of years.”
A recent email from ACE to museum professionals said ACE had heard the “majority of participants would prefer a longer returns cycle” and that there are elements of the scheme that need to be streamlined and made more efficient. The email also said: “It must be frustrating not to know exactly what the timescales are at this stage. We’re working up the new schedule at the moment.”
Regarding the delay to the review, a museum development officer, who wishes to remain anonymous, says: “It has taken longer than expected, suggesting it’s been a more thorough set of changes than had previously been suggested.
“But I don’t know what to expect when it comes back. There are museums that were due to make returns and have been contacted by the arts council and had their dates pushed back.
“There has been a backlog and the arts council hasn’t been able to get on top of Accreditation returns since it was transferred over from the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council [which was closed in 2012].
“There has also been quite a high staff turnover in the team. The team is great and really helpful, but I don’t think it has been fully staffed for long periods of time.
The Accreditation scheme, which ACE says is undergoing a review to make it “more useful and user-friendly”, sets nationally agreed standards for museums in the UK.
The scheme was last reviewed in 2011, when it was updated to put more focus on visitors’ needs. The current review was announced in early 2017. The scheme is expected to be relaunched this autumn, when museums will be expected to provide evidence they meet Accreditation requirements, which for some comes later than expected.
Claire Browne, the chair of the National Museum Development Network, says: “They have gone deeper than they originally anticipated. The problems with the scheme had become broader than they originally thought.”
One museum professional surveyed by ACE regarding Accreditation says “it was one of the most important things to have happened within British museums”, while another claims it has “lost its way”.
Thorough consultation
Browne adds: “What is good is that they have consulted very thoroughly with the sector and have scrutinised all sides of it, both internally and externally.
“The next stage is to win people back a little bit and communicate the changes,so that people aren’t fearful. The review will bring positive changes, but there is some entrenched negativity because the things that were going wrong with the scheme were going wrong for a number of years.”
A recent email from ACE to museum professionals said ACE had heard the “majority of participants would prefer a longer returns cycle” and that there are elements of the scheme that need to be streamlined and made more efficient. The email also said: “It must be frustrating not to know exactly what the timescales are at this stage. We’re working up the new schedule at the moment.”
Regarding the delay to the review, a museum development officer, who wishes to remain anonymous, says: “It has taken longer than expected, suggesting it’s been a more thorough set of changes than had previously been suggested.
“But I don’t know what to expect when it comes back. There are museums that were due to make returns and have been contacted by the arts council and had their dates pushed back.
“There has been a backlog and the arts council hasn’t been able to get on top of Accreditation returns since it was transferred over from the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council [which was closed in 2012].
“There has also been quite a high staff turnover in the team. The team is great and really helpful, but I don’t think it has been fully staffed for long periods of time.
“However, I hope the new system will simplify the process and take a lot of jargon out of it.”
84% To access funding
76% As an organisational health check
73% As a motivator to ensure policies and plans are in date
Top four reasons for being accredited
86% Demonstrating that you’ve met a national standard84% To access funding
76% As an organisational health check
73% As a motivator to ensure policies and plans are in date