Category Archives: Community engagement

What is the Future of Interpretation at Historic House Museums?

The world of historic house museums has been grappling with fundamental questions about purpose and sustainability for many years. Two significant gatherings, the Kykuit II Summit in 2007 and the recent 2025 Historic House Summit, highlight key moments in this ongoing discussion. Bridging these two events is the American Association for State and Local History’s (AASLH) STEPS program, particularly its standards for interpretation, which emerged directly from the needs identified in that earlier period. Looking at these three points in time reveals not only evolving ideas but also the increasing urgency and specific challenges facing interpretation today. 

The Kykuit II Summit: The Call for Sustainability and Standards

The Kykuit II Summit, held in April 2007 at the John D. Rockefeller estate, brought together leaders to discuss “the sustainability of historic sites.” This was a follow-up to a similar meeting five years prior. The discussions focused on finding ways for historic sites, the largest segment of the museum community, to thrive. Key questions included the challenging, “unmentionable” ones: “Does America need another house museum?” or “Can America support the existing historic sites it now has?”

Continue reading →

Fundraising After Crisis: Lessons from the Gamble House

Extent of Eaton Fire, 2025. Courtesy Wikimedia Commons.

When disaster strikes, how should a museum approach fundraising? A recent appeal from the Gamble House Conservancy offers an excellent model.

Following the devastating Eaton Fire in January 2025, the Gamble House framed its appeal not simply around its own needs, but around its role in the community’s recovery. The letter powerfully connects the Gamble House to the larger regional tragedy, emphasizing the museum as a place of respite, inspiration, and service. Rather than focusing solely on damage or lost revenue, the appeal highlights how the museum has already acted: removing collections, supporting staff and volunteers, surveying visitors to guide future programs, and partnering with displaced nonprofits like the Pasadena Audubon Society.

The Conservancy also effectively maintained its core mission. Ongoing conservation efforts, such as addressing water intrusion and repairing the side yard gate, are presented alongside expanded community initiatives. This dual focus reassures donors that their gifts support both immediate public needs and long-term stewardship.

Finally, the letter makes giving easy. In addition to traditional mail-in donations, a QR code directs supporters to a secure online portal, meeting donors where they are.

The takeaway for museums and nonprofits? After a crisis, connect your organization’s needs to the broader recovery, demonstrate early action, and align core mission work with new community service roles. Fundraising after a disaster isn’t just about survival — it’s about showing how your institution remains essential to the life of the community it serves.

Gamble House Fundraising Letter 2025-04Download

Interpreting Historic House Museums Today: Reflections on the 2025 AASLH Summit

By Mary A. van Balgooy, Vice President, Engaging Places LLC

Last week, I attended the 2025 AASLH Historic House Museums Summit, “Interpreting Historic House Museums Today,” held at the Edsel and Eleanor Ford House in Grosse Pointe Shores, Michigan. Over 100 museum professionals from across the country came together to assess where interpretation stands today and how it should evolve over the next decade. The Summit’s objectives were clear: attendees would examine the current scope of historic house interpretation, identify trends for the next 10-15 years, and define the major issues shaping the field. Through keynotes, breakout sessions, and informal discussions, attendees tackled major questions about our roles, responsibilities, and hopes for the sector.

Big Ideas from the 2025 AASLH Summit

One of the most powerful themes to emerge was the need to embrace “whole history.” Instead of narrowly focusing on furniture, technology, or architectural details, participants stressed telling a full, human-centered story. This includes voices often left out of traditional interpretation: women, people of color, laborers, and marginalized groups. The idea is not merely to add these perspectives but to reframe interpretation through them, reflecting the complexity and moral ambiguity of historical figures and events.

A second major idea was that historic house museums must move beyond passive presentation into active engagement. Museums should create dialogic experiences where visitors reflect, question, and even challenge the past. Skills like listening, civil discourse, and conflict navigation were identified as essential for future staff training.

Finally, participants stressed the importance of using interpretation as a tool for healing and community building. At a time of social division, historic sites have a unique role to play in fostering empathy, historical curiosity, and nuanced understanding.

Findings and Recommendations

Continue reading →

Webinar: Interpreting Winter Holidays on June 12

I know, we’re barely out of winter and we’re talking about winter holidays?? If you work at a museum or historic site, I know you’re already planning and we’re here to help!

Building upon the AASLH publication Interpreting Christmas at Museums and Historic Sites and our 2024 webinar on Maximizing Your Museum’s Holiday Potential, this webinar will explore how historic houses and history museums can transform the holiday season into a powerful opportunity for community engagement, inclusivity, and innovation. Focusing on Christmas, Hanukkah, and Kwanzaa, this presentation will offer case studies of successful programming and exhibits from across the country and brainstorming on how participants can scale and adapt these ideas to fit their local contexts and community needs.

Presenters include:

DATE: June 12, 2025

TIME: 3:00 – 4:15 pm EASTERN (Remember to adjust for your time zone)

COST: $25 AASLH members/$45 nonmembers

To register or for more details, visit the AASLH Resource Center.

The VRIO Framework: Looking Inward, Thinking Forward

When I was chatting with John Wetenhall, director of the GW Museum, he mentioned a business analysis tool I had never heard of: VRIO. It was a surprisingly lively conversation about whether this corporate framework could apply to museums and historic sites—and it piqued my curiosity. Developed by Birger Wernerfelt in his landmark 1984 article “A Resource-Based View of the Firm,” and later refined by Jay Barney in “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage” (1991), VRIO offers a way to evaluate whether an organization’s internal assets truly contribute to long-term success. The acronym stands for Value (does it help the organization exploit opportunities or neutralize threats?), Rarity (is it scarce among competitors?), Imitability (is it difficult to duplicate or substitute?), and Organization (is the organization structured to fully leverage it?).

What began as a theoretical framework for corporations turns out to have practical potential for cultural institutions as well. Tools like logic models and Porter’s Five Forces are helpful, but what about the museum’s internal capabilities? How do we know if our collections, staff, or community ties are truly strategic advantages? Two articles by Paul Knott at the University of Christ Church (New Zealand) offer guidance by critically examining the popular VRIO framework—and how it can work better for cultural institutions.

Insight #1: Strengthening Strategy with an Expanded VRIO Model

In “Integrating Resource-Based Theory in a Practice-Relevant Form” (2009), Knott builds on the traditional VRIO model—Value, Rarity, Imitability, Organization—to create a more actionable and dynamic approach. He emphasizes that internal resources (like a museum’s brand, reputation, or community partnerships) are only strategic if they are used under the right conditions. Critically, he introduces a matrix that shows how the same resource can be a strength, weakness, missed opportunity, or rigidity depending on how it’s managed. This is a significant improvement over the traditional SWOT exercise because it requires you to evaluate each asset or resource with specific questions.

Continue reading →

Rethinking Goals in History Organizations: A New Framework for Internal and External Impact

For many years, history organizations—including history museums, historical societies, house museums, and historic sites—have measured success using a traditional planning framework focused on outputs (what an organization produces). By the 1990s, there was a growing recognition of the importance of outcomes (how visitors change because of that work), over merely completing tasks.

While the confusingly-named outputs and outcomes framework have improved museum projects, they often overlook how history organizations themselves evolve—how their staff, volunteers, and boards gain knowledge, shift perspectives, and take action to improve their work.

I’d like to introduce a new way of thinking about goals in museums, distinguishing between internal change (within the organization) and external change (within the community and visitors). Using the Know, Feel, Do framework, this model helps history organizations better understand their impact—both inside and outside the institution.

The Know, Feel, Do framework is a structured approach to understanding how individuals and organizations learn, experience emotions, and take action. It is based on Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Domains, which classifies learning into three categories:

  1. Cognitive (Know) – Intellectual engagement and knowledge acquisition.
  2. Affective (Feel) – Emotional and attitudinal responses.
  3. Behavioral (Do) – Actions taken as a result of learning.

This model is widely used in education, marketing, nonprofit management, and project evaluation to design experiences that lead to meaningful change.

The Traditional Model: Outputs vs. Outcomes

Continue reading →

Building Lasting Museum Connections: The Four Levels of Audience Engagement

Imagine this: you’ve spent weeks planning a concert at your local history museum. You’ve arranged every detail, from booking a fantastic band to setting up the stage. The chairs are perfectly aligned, the lighting is just right, and the atmosphere feels full of possibility. But as the start time approaches, your excitement gives way to nervous glances at the clock. The parking lot remains empty. You keep hoping someone will arrive late, but after ten minutes, the seats are still vacant. The band—thankfully understanding—decides to use the time to practice, and while their music fills the room, you’re left grappling with embarrassment and frustration. Just a week earlier, a similar concert you organized thirty miles away had a packed house. What went wrong this time? How could the results be so different?

That happened to me early in my museum career and it was a humbling lesson. Perhaps you’ve faced similar moments—community events that fell flat, partnerships that fizzled, or publicity that didn’t attract attention. It’s easy to feel defeated when a community group declines to collaborate because their priorities don’t align, or when a business association’s objectives clash with the mission of interpreting artifacts rather than hosting public events. Sometimes, the problem is simply bandwidth—not enough staff to attend community meetings or follow up with volunteers. Community engagement can feel like a puzzle with a lot of missing pieces. But with the right tools, those challenges can transform into opportunities.

Continue reading →

How to Turn Exploratory Visitors into Loyal Fans

Museums and historic sites face a persistent challenge: how to transform mildly interested visitors into deeply engaged patrons. These exploratory visitors—those who follow your social media accounts, visit the website, or attend an occasional event—represent a critical audience segment with untapped potential. How can museums help these visitors feel more connected and motivated to return?

Three recent studies offer actionable insights into addressing this challenge: one on the power of framing and emotional relevance, another on the role of clear wayfinding in reducing visitor anxiety, and a third on the holistic visitor experience at heritage attractions.

Lesson 1: Framing and Emotional Relevance Matter

In “The Role of Framing, Agency, and Uncertainty in a Focus-Divide Dilemma,” Justin Claydon et al highlight how contextual framing—presenting information in a familiar, relatable way—dramatically improves motivation and engagement. When tasks are abstract or unfamiliar, people struggle to prioritize and engage effectively. Conversely, framing a task with real-world relevance reduces uncertainty and increases interest.

Continue reading →

Is Free Admission Really the Key to Unlocking Museum Doors?

Imagine walking into a museum for the first time. The sunlight filters through glass atriums, the smell of polished wood and history greets you, and the quiet hum of curiosity fills the air. For some, this is an everyday experience. For others, it’s a world they’ve never dared to enter. Free admission promises to change that, throwing open the doors to anyone, regardless of their pocketbook. But does it really work? I scanned the journals to see what researchers had discovered.

What Free Admission Gets Right

Let’s face it—free admission has a magnetic pull. People are more likely to take a chance when the price barrier vanishes. Lin (2008) notes that museums offering free access often see surges in attendance. Suddenly, a day at the museum isn’t competing with groceries or a new pair of shoes—it’s a possibility.

In France, Gall-Ely et al. (2007) found that free admission felt like a gift. Visitors talked about how it gave them permission to explore without guilt or second-guessing. Think of it as a universal invitation: “Come in, look around. This is your space, too.” Similarly, Barbosa and Brito (2012) found that open-day events broke the ice, especially for hesitant first-timers. Those who’d never considered a museum visit were finally stepping inside.

Continue reading →

Navigating New Federal Policies: What Executive Orders Mean for History Museums and Historic Sites

Museums are no strangers to navigating shifting policy landscapes, but recent executive orders issued by the White House signal significant changes that will affect funding, interpretation, and educational outreach. Whether you work in a history museum, a historic preservation organization, or a community-based historical society, understanding these policies is crucial for adapting to new challenges and opportunities.

Key Themes Across the Executive Orders

1. A Shift Toward Patriotic and Nationalist Narratives

Executive Orders 14190 (Ending Radical Indoctrination in K–12 Schooling) and 14189 (Celebrating America’s 250th Birthday) prioritize “patriotic education” and reinforce a government-endorsed interpretation of American history. This shift is exemplified by the reestablishment of the 1776 Commission and the creation of Task Force 250, which will oversee programming related to the 250th anniversary of American independence. “Patriotic education” is defined as “the history of America grounded in:

  • (i) an accurate, honest, unifying, inspiring, and ennobling characterization of America’s founding and foundational principles;
  • (ii) a clear examination of how the United States has admirably grown closer to its noble principles throughout its history;
  • (iii) the concept that commitment to America’s aspirations is beneficial and justified; and
  • (iv) the concept that celebration of America’s greatness and history is proper.”

2. The Elimination of Federal DEI and Environmental Justice Programs

Executive Order 14151 (Ending Radical and Wasteful DEI Programs and Preferencing) eliminates all federal support for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. This includes the termination of DEI-related grants, plans, contracts, programs, initiatives, training programs, offices, positions, and employment policies within federal agencies, “under whatever name they appear.” Museums that have benefited from federal DEI funding or programs may need to reassess their funding strategies and institutional policies.

3. Renaming and Monument Preservation

Executive Order 14172 (Restoring Names That Honor American Greatness) renames Denali back to Mount McKinley and designates the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America. Additionally, the reinstatement of the National Garden of American Heroes and the protection of existing monuments signal a renewed emphasis on traditional historical figures. Museums may face increased scrutiny when interpreting contested histories, particularly around geographic names and public commemorations.

Continue reading →