<%BANNER%>

Hurricanes and Historic House Museums

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024629/00001

Material Information

Title: Hurricanes and Historic House Museums Discovering the Essential Guidelines in a Historic House Museum Disaster Plan
Physical Description: 1 online resource (134 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Bassett, Jennifer
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: design, disaster, historic, house, hurricane, interior, museum, planning, preparedeness, preservation
Interior Design -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Interior Design thesis, M.I.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Disaster preparedness plans play a significant role in protecting historic structures during a hurricane situation. In recent years an increasing number of hurricanes and tropical storms hit Florida, as well as the United States? Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. During the last five years storms such as Katrina and Ivan decimated coastal cities and towns. Such destruction cost people their livelihoods, their homes, and, in the worst cases, their lives. In the museum and historic preservation communities, the toll of these storms has been particularly significant. As a result of hurricanes, every state along the eastern coast from Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, to Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina lost historical structures. Informal accounts suggested that museum size and funding had a major impact on hurricane disaster preparedness procedures that each institution employs. One goal behind this research was to discover how size variables influenced the disaster preparedness plans of museums. These variables included physical size of the property, size of historic house, value of collection in historic house, number of historic buildings on property, the budget size of the museum, amount of improvements on the historic house, total number of museum staff members, number of historic house staff members, and number of staff members for disaster plan execution. A second goal was to propose common guidelines that could be used for historic house museums of a variety of sizes.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Jennifer Bassett.
Thesis: Thesis (M.I.D.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Torres Antonini, Maruja A.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0024629:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024629/00001

Material Information

Title: Hurricanes and Historic House Museums Discovering the Essential Guidelines in a Historic House Museum Disaster Plan
Physical Description: 1 online resource (134 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Bassett, Jennifer
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: design, disaster, historic, house, hurricane, interior, museum, planning, preparedeness, preservation
Interior Design -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Interior Design thesis, M.I.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Disaster preparedness plans play a significant role in protecting historic structures during a hurricane situation. In recent years an increasing number of hurricanes and tropical storms hit Florida, as well as the United States? Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. During the last five years storms such as Katrina and Ivan decimated coastal cities and towns. Such destruction cost people their livelihoods, their homes, and, in the worst cases, their lives. In the museum and historic preservation communities, the toll of these storms has been particularly significant. As a result of hurricanes, every state along the eastern coast from Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, to Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina lost historical structures. Informal accounts suggested that museum size and funding had a major impact on hurricane disaster preparedness procedures that each institution employs. One goal behind this research was to discover how size variables influenced the disaster preparedness plans of museums. These variables included physical size of the property, size of historic house, value of collection in historic house, number of historic buildings on property, the budget size of the museum, amount of improvements on the historic house, total number of museum staff members, number of historic house staff members, and number of staff members for disaster plan execution. A second goal was to propose common guidelines that could be used for historic house museums of a variety of sizes.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Jennifer Bassett.
Thesis: Thesis (M.I.D.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Torres Antonini, Maruja A.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0024629:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 HURRICANES AND HISTORIC HOUSE MUSEUMS: DISCOVERING THE ESSENTIAL GUIDELINES IN A HISTORIC HOUSE MUSEUM DISASTER PLAN By JENNIFER LEIGH BASSETT A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTI AL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF INTERIOR DESIGN UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2009

PAGE 2

2 2009 Jennifer Leigh Bassett

PAGE 3

3 To my family and friends without whose constant love and support, none of this would have been possible.

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I want to begin with thanking my supervisory committee for their insight and support throughout this thesis research. My committee chair, Dr. Maruja Torres Antonini challenged me to reach beyond my comfort levels as my studio design professor, and then helped me focus my energies into realizing my research goals as my chairperson. Professor Roy Graham was an invaluable asset to my thesis as he guided my research through the realm of Historic Preserva tion and offered important insight and aide. I would like to thank the John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art in Sarasota. In particular, I am indebted to Ron McCarty who facilitated my visits and data collection. Also, I would like to thank The Gulf Coas t Heritage Association, Inc and the staff of Historic Spanish Point. Hope Kocian especially, was helpful with contributing her knowledge and information to this research. I would like to thank God; through Him all things are possible. I thank my husband Bryan for his love and support. I thank my mother, Charlotte, who always told me that I could succeed at whatever I put my mind to. I would like to thank my brother, Stephen, for his wit and humor through it all, and to the rest of my family and friends for their continual support of my scholastic endeavors. Lastly, I would like to thank my dogs, Rika, Lucky, and Oberon for their hours of muchneeded diversion and emotional comfort during this journey.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................................8 LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................13 Hurricane and Disaster Relation .............................................................................................15 Impact on House Museums ....................................................................................................16 Summary .................................................................................................................................19 2 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................20 Sense of Place: Identity, Attachment and Significance ..........................................................20 Historic House Museums ........................................................................................................22 Historic Preservation ..............................................................................................................25 Museum Funding ....................................................................................................................26 Resources for Disaster and Museum Management ................................................................27 International .....................................................................................................................27 National ...........................................................................................................................28 State .................................................................................................................................29 Local ................................................................................................................................30 Disaster Mitigation .................................................................................................................30 Disasters and Disaster Related Damage ..........................................................................30 Preparation and Planning .................................................................................................33 Pre made Disaster Plans ..................................................................................................36 Summary .................................................................................................................................38 3 RESEARCH METHODS .......................................................................................................40 Research Questions and Hypotheses ......................................................................................40 Case Study Strategy ................................................................................................................41 Scope of the Study ..................................................................................................................42 Disaster Preparedness Plan Case Studies ...............................................................................43 Participants ......................................................................................................................44 Process .............................................................................................................................44 Site visits ..................................................................................................................45 Diagramming ............................................................................................................45 Content analysis of written plans .............................................................................47 Questionnaires ..........................................................................................................48 Interviews .................................................................................................................48

PAGE 6

6 Chain of evidence .....................................................................................................49 Et hical Considerations: IRB Explanation and Exemption ......................................................49 Summary .................................................................................................................................50 4 RESULTS ...............................................................................................................................51 The John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art: C dZan Mansion .......................................51 Museum Profile ...............................................................................................................51 Property Improvements: Retrofitt ing and Habitat Alterations ........................................53 Plan Implementation ........................................................................................................54 Plan Basis and Revisions .................................................................................................57 Current Hurricane Plan ....................................................................................................57 Structure ...................................................................................................................57 Content summary .....................................................................................................58 Content Analysis .............................................................................................................59 Categories .................................................................................................................59 Model .......................................................................................................................61 Historic Spanish Point ............................................................................................................61 Museum Profile ...............................................................................................................61 Property Improvements: Retrofitting and Habitat Alterations ........................................63 Plan Implementation ........................................................................................................64 Plan Basis and Revisions .................................................................................................66 Current Disaster Plan .......................................................................................................67 Structure ...................................................................................................................67 Content summary .....................................................................................................67 Content Analysis .............................................................................................................68 Categories .................................................................................................................68 Model .......................................................................................................................70 5 DISCUSSION .........................................................................................................................89 Cross Case Conclusions .........................................................................................................89 Size Variable Effects .......................................................................................................90 Property size .............................................................................................................90 Budget and staff .......................................................................................................92 Property improvements ............................................................................................93 Extraneous variables: setting, accreditation, and governance ..................................94 Plan Analysis and Explanation ........................................................................................95 Disaster plans ...........................................................................................................95 Six essential guide line categories .............................................................................99 Recommendations: Historic House Museum Disaster Preparedness Plan ...........................102 Proposed Essential Guidelines Category Sequencing Model ........................................103 Plan suggestion .......................................................................................................105 Sequence .................................................................................................................105 Plan Actio ns ...................................................................................................................106 Organize .................................................................................................................106 Communicate .........................................................................................................107

PAGE 7

7 Secure .....................................................................................................................109 Relocate ..................................................................................................................109 Recover ...................................................................................................................110 Supply .....................................................................................................................111 Further Research ...................................................................................................................112 APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE ..............................................................................................................123 B INTERVIEW QUESTIONS .................................................................................................126 C MUSEUM RESOURCES .....................................................................................................127 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................129 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .......................................................................................................134

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF TABLES Table page 41 Plan content analysis categories and itemized action distribution list. ..............................78 42 Plan co ntent analysis categories and itemized action distribution list ...............................87 51 Comparison between the participating museums disaster plans. ...................................116 52 Before the storm subsections and steps. ..........................................................................120 53 During the storm subsections and steps. ..........................................................................121 54 After the storm sub sections and steps. .............................................................................122

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 11 Oblique satellite view of Hurricane Katrina. 14 ..................................................................... 31 Flow char t legend. ..............................................................................................................46 41 Circus Museums Tibbals Learning Center. ......................................................................71 42 The Museum of Art and courtyard. ....................................................................................71 43 Banyan Caf. ......................................................................................................................72 44 Ringling Estate aerial image showing location of the historic mansion in respect to Sarasota Bay waterfront. 72 .................................................................................................... 45 Panels over courtyard skylight to protect it from sun and projectile damage. ...................73 46 Interior view of courtyard skylight with original stained glass. ........................................73 47 C dZan Mansion plan implementation ...........................................................................74 48 Structure of current Ringling Museum hurricane plan. .....................................................75 49 C dZan Mansion plan content. ........................................................................................76 410 The smaller items of furniture, such as these arm chairs, lamps and tables would be relocated. ............................................................................................................................77 411 Larger items, such as this credenza would remain in place, covered in plastic or moved away from windows. ..............................................................................................77 412 P lan content analysis p ie chart showing perc entages of total actions that fall into each guideline category. .............................................................................................................79 413 Ringling plan content analysis categories relationship model. ..........................................79 414 Guptill house, a twostory residence built by the pioneers ................................................80 415 Acorn Cottage, built in 1935, closed to the public. ...........................................................80 416 White Cottage. ...................................................................................................................81 417 White Cottage in relation to the southern waterfront of Historic Spanish Points Peninsula. ...........................................................................................................................81 418 Aerial image showing His toric Spanish Point location in respect to Little Sarasota Bay waterfront 82 ...................................................................................................................

PAGE 10

10 419 Piano, original to the Guptill House. .................................................................................82 420 P eriod furniture in the Guptill House .................................................................................83 421 Period furniture in the Guptill House .................................................................................83 422 Historic Spanish Point plan implement ation. .....................................................................84 423 Structure of current Historic Spanish Point hurricane plan ...............................................85 424 Historic Spanish Point plan content. ..................................................................................86 425 Plan content analysis pie chart showing percentages of total actions that fall into each guideline category. .............................................................................................................88 426 Historic Spa nish Point plan content analysis categories relationship model .....................88 51 Examined plans comparable relationship model content analysis categories found in the plans interacted similarly. ......................................................................................117 52 Effects of budget and size on disaster preparedness. .......................................................118 53 Proposed sequencing model for essential preparedness guideline ca tegories. ................119

PAGE 11

11 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Interior Design HURRICANES AND HISTORIC HOUSE MUSEUMS: DISCOVERING THE ESSENTIAL GUIDELINES IN A HISTORIC HOUSE MUSEUM DISASTER PLAN By Jennifer Leigh Bassett August 2009 Chair: Maruja Torres Antonini Major: Interior Design Disaster preparedness plans play a significant role in protecting historic structu res during a hurricane situation. In recent years an increasing number of hurric anes and tropical storms hit Florida, as well as the United S tates Atlantic and Gulf Coasts During the past five years storms such as Katrina and Ivan decimated coastal cit ies and towns Such destruction cost people their livelihoods, their homes, and, in the worst cases, their lives. In the museum and historic preservation communities, the toll of these storms has been particularly significant. As a result of hurricanes every state along the eastern coast from Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, to Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina lost historical structures. Informal accounts suggest ed that museum size and funding had a major impact on hurrican e disaster preparedness procedures that each institution employs. One goal behind this research was to discover how size variables influenced the disaster preparedness plans of museums. These variables include d physical size of the property, size of hist oric house, value of collection in historic house, number of historic buildings on property, the budget size of the museum, amount of improvements on the historic house, total number of museum staff members, number of historic house staff members, and number of staff members for disaster plan

PAGE 12

12 execution. A second goal was to propose common guidelines that could be used for historic house museums of a variety of sizes.

PAGE 13

13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Climatic change in recent decades has made comprehensive disaster preparedness plans a must have for historic house museums, especially in the Gulf Coast and Atlantic Regions. Holland and Webster in their 2007 study on heightened tropical cyclone activity concluded that the recent upsurge in tropical cyclone frequenc y is due in part to greenhouse warming and this is most likely the dominant effect (p. 23). They also explained that the size or proportion of hurricanes is caused by cyclical climatic behavior, this accounts for the notably strong storms mentioned in hi story (Holland & Webster, 2007). Some of these storms include the 1900 Galveston hurricane, commonly called Isaacs Storm (Larson, 1999) and the strongest recorded hurricane to hit the United States, the 1935 Labor Day Storm. This hurricane struck the Fl orida Keys and killed over four hundred people (Leatherman & Williams, 2008). In August 1969, Hurricane Camille, a category five storm with wind speed close to 200 mph, impacted Louisiana and Mississippi (Bechtel, 2006). During the week of September 1723, 1989, Hurricane Hugo one of the most devastating storms up to that time took roofs off historic buildings and broke windows, allowing water damage from flood waters and rain (Nelson, 1991). It is believed that Hugos winds, rains, and floods damaged a t least an estimated 7,000 irreplaceable resources and caused hundreds of millions of dollars in losses to historic places (Nelson, 1991, p. 38). With tropical cyclone strength as a major issue throughout history, modern climatic change has made hurrican es more frequent. The recent surge in the number of Atlantic storms, studied by Holland and Webster, was apparent in the 2004, 2005 and 2008 hurricane seasons. The 2004 Atlantic Hurricane Season included fifteen tropical storms and nine hurricanes. Six of those nine hurricanes were considered major storms (NOAA, 2008). The increased frequency of these large storms, due to

PAGE 14

14 climatic change, impacted the southern and eastern United States. This impact was not only seen in loss of life but in loss of proper ty. The storms caused billions of dollars in damage to populated areas. During that 2004 season, Central Florida experienced severe flooding and damage totaling over $42 billion as hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan, and then Jeanne ripped through the sta te (Bechtel, 2006). The next year, 2005, surpassed the 1969 record of twelve hurricanes with twenty seven named storms, fifteen of which attained hurricane status (NOAA, 2006). Hurricanes Dennis, Emily, Katrina, Rita, and Wilma, all rated at least a Category Four, impacted the states surrounding the Gulf of Mexico (Bechtel, 2006). Four of those seven major hurricanes reached Category Five status, the highest number of such category hurricanes ever seen in one season (NOAA, 2006). The most destructive of these storms, Hurricane Katrina, impacted the southern tip of Florida and went on, as a category three storm at landfall, to demolish New Orleans, Louisiana (Figure 11). Figure 11. Oblique satellite view of Hurricane Katrina. Retrieved on February 25, 2009 from http://serc.carleton.edu/details/images/5862.html. This item is in the public domain and may be reused freely without restriction.

PAGE 15

15 Hurricane Katrina caused over $100 billion total losses and over $34 billion insured losses (NOAA, 2006). D uring the 2008 hurricane season, Hurricane Ike flooded Galvestons historic district with seven feet of water (Brice, A., Callebs, S., Dornin, R. et al., 2008). Florida, in particular, has been affected by more storms than any other state in the United St ates, with North Carolina coming in at a close second (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1998). With all of this chaos and destruction, it is imperative that our most treasured resources and historic places have adequate disaster plans. Exper ts alert us that by preparing for the certainty of the next potentially disastrous natural event whether hurricane, earthquake, tornado, flood, or fire we may be able to save irreplaceable sites, objects and even whole communities (Nelson, 1991, p. 6). Hurricane and Disaster Relation Hurricanes are specific types of disasters that widely affect the southern and eastern United States. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) define hurricanes as Atlantic cyclones that usually begin off the coast of northern Africa. These cyclones then proceed west towards North and South America. Hurricanes include massive amounts of rain and high winds that can cause damage and chaos when they hit inhabited areas (NOAA, 2006). When a storm is noted and approaching, the National Hurricane Center (NHC) gives the storm a pre approved name and issues watches and warnings to the public. When hurricane force winds are possible within thirty six hours, a hurricane watch is called. That watch is upgraded t o a warning when hurricane force winds are expected within twentyfour hours. These watches and warnings are meant to avoid possible disasters by giving individuals, families, businesses and governments a time frame in which to prepare for a storm situation. The categories 1 5 are from the damage potential scale developed by Herbert Saffir, an engineer from Florida, and Robert Simpson, director of the NHC. This scale serves as a general guide to what force winds to

PAGE 16

16 expect in the storm as well as expected damage (Leatherman & Williams, 2008). The increasing frequency of hurricanes, such as in the aforementioned 2004, 2005 and 2008 Atlantic Hurricane seasons as reported by NOAA, should signal that the building standards need reviewing. Like newer buildings, historic structures need preparation to withstand additional wind and water forces. The concept of disaster has and array of different meanings and definitions. McDonald (2003) in Introduction to Natural and Manmade Disasters and Their Effects on Bu ildings states, a disaster can be defined as an event, either natural or man made, which has the ability to destroy life, natural landscape and man made infrastructure (p. 6). A second concept of disaster, from the Oxford Dictionary, is mentioned by McD onald (2003) : a sudden or great misfortune, calamity, great failure, ill starred event which gives an indication of how we perceive disaster: unpredictable, outside our control, and overpowering; an event, controlle d by the stats and gods! ( p. 1). Hurr icanes, tornados, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and other natural phenomena are not considered disasters when they strike relatively uninhabited parts of the earth. It is when these events affect populated areas that they are deemed disasters. McDonal d (2003) comments, The same event, in different circumstances, could be a source of scientific data or a deadly catastrophe. It all depends on where it took place and how it was perceived ( p. 6). Spennemann and Look in Disaster Management Programs for Hi storic Sites agree that, Natural phenomena are considered disasters only when they adversely affect lives and property (1998, p. iii). The concept of disaster then depends on human perception of the effects a natural event causes. Impact on House Museum s The Historic Preservation community has organized programs to aid historic sites and their administrations in coping with natural disasters. There are volumes of literature explaining

PAGE 17

17 disasters, historic building restoration steps, and actions to be tak en before, during and after calamity strikes. In response to the literature and continuing damage, conferences are held on all levels by international, national and local historical groups to discuss the natural events of the past year. The conferences also cover new techniques and technological advances in disaster emergency planning, mitigation and recovery. However, as disasters become more frequent in our ever changing worldwide climate, disaster preparedness plans emerge as essential components in the effort to safeguard the treasures from our global past. Historic sites are tourist attractions that bring revenue to local areas. In the event of a direct strike, the repair costs of these structures strain state and local governments that provide funding for cultural venues. A lack of preparedness can lead to the inadvertent loss of or increased damage to historic resources. Insufficient damage assessments, unsuitable debris management, inappropriate repair, and limited input from knowledgeable st ate and local preservation professionals all contribute to the problem (1000 Friends of Florida, 2008, p. 3). Hurricane preparedness is defined by the 2005 Heritage Preservation report, Before and After Disasters: Federal Funding for Cultural Institutions, as being ready to handle disasters and emergencies. Risk assessments, disaster planning, adequate supplies, trained staff, and community partnerships all contribute to disaster preparedness (p. 3). Mitigation, mentioned in the same report, is described as the process of preventing or minimizing the losses and damages that emergencies can cause (Heritage Preservation, 2005, p. 3). Often, smaller museums do not have the funding and staff for a major undertaking of disaster preparation or mitigation. K nowing which essential guidelines a plan should contain would aid in safeguarding these small but significant historical treasures. Historic house museums are historic structures that formerly served as residences and have since been adapted to use as his tory museums. According to Hardesty and Little (2000), a

PAGE 18

18 historic structure is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) to further define its significant historical value to the local community. The Register, founded by the National Hist oric Preservation Act, lists historic properties considered to be important to the national heritage of the United States. The properties may be of archaeological, historic, architectural, engineering, or cultural value (Hardesty & Little, 2000). As muse ums, these properties are important education tools in studying the daily lives of people in the past. Historic house museums are specifically important to research and preservation because houses, more than any other structure, exhibit the human side of history (Hupp & Stewart, 1995, Preface). These past homes, preserved to their periods of historical significance, are beneficial to the education of people today. They provide insight about past design styles everyday tasks and duties and relationships of the people who lived in the structure. Learning about these tasks gives modern individuals valuable knowledge about class structure, society, human nature, and important events throughout history. According to Hupp and Stewart (1995), looking at houses examining the size and materials and amount of ornamentation also is a way of tracing a region s growth and sophistication (p.1). House museums reduce the loss of historic interiors by maintaining and preserving the artifacts within and providing a safe environment for educational interaction with history. Part of the public appeal historic house museums have is their ability to reflect historical interior design styles. These styles reflect the time period, social status and personal preference of historic figures. Changing these interiors for the sake of modernizing disrupts the historical integrity and educational value of these structures: alterations or modifications to original character and fabric will most likely degrade the intrinsic va lue of the object and will probably lower the economic value of the object (Siekkinen, 1998, p. 45). Thus, retrofitting them for

PAGE 19

19 storm protection can oftentimes impact the historical value of the structure if care is not taken in the planning and executi on of these upgrades. Summary Climate change has increased the frequency of natural phenomena. In Florida, the most common of these are hurricanes, which annually visit the state between the months of June and November. Unfortunately these tropical cyc lones can potentially cause billions of dollars in property damage and, in the worst case scenarios, severe loss of life. In doing so, these natural occurrences go from being scientific wonders to being natural disasters. To safeguard against storm damage preparedness procedures are enacted before a storm makes landfall. Where historic house museums are concerned, their destruction impacts the local economy and historical fabric. To keep the past intact, planning for these situations is essential. Therefore, the examination of disaster preparedness plans for these museums is paramount. One goal behind this research is to discover how different variables affect hurricane preparedness procedures the institutions employ. An additional goal is to identify a common set of guidelines that could be used by museums of a variety of sizes in creating disaster plans or updating existing disaster plans

PAGE 20

20 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW The following review of the most applicable literature on hurricane preparedness pl anning and historic preservation topics provides a background for the issues raised in this research study. The first section explains why historic residential structures are essential by exploring the connection between individuals and the concept of hom e, and how nostalgia becomes attachment. Following sections look at historic house museums, historic preservation, and the resources they have at their disposal. The final section expounds on disaster mitigation and what is currently being done to prepare historic house museums for impending hurricane disaster scenarios. Sense of Place: Identity, Attachment and Significance People develop connections to certain places, including historic areas, structures and landmarks, for a variety of reasons. These r easons incorporate associated memories and an individuals identity to a physical place, which forms a type of nostalgia. According to environmental psychologist David Kopec (2006) a major instigator for a sense of nostalgia in people is when destruction occurs. Destruction can include damage to the historic structure, interior furnishings, or material finishes. Such things cannot often by replaced, which can then lead to modifications of the building or complete structure removal. Affected people develop nostalgic feelings for what the place or structure was like before the destruction occurred. These nostalgic feelings can then develop into a form of place attachment or sense of place (p. 63). A true sense of place occurs when people associate feel ings of comfort and safety with a specific location. This association leads to a sense of belonging, culturally and personally, to a certain place, area, community or building.

PAGE 21

21 Emotional attachment must be present for a sense of place to form. Places w ith which people attach become a part of their cultural identity (Kopec, 2006). According to Kopec these places would include any location where individuals spent much time, or to which they associated strong feelings. Likely locations include a persons residence, school, work, local store or hangout: In short, a persons history combines with a setting to form a sense of place ( Kopec, 2006, p. 62.). In House Thinking, Winifred Gallagher, says that in the modern discipline of environmental psychology, human behavior is connected to an individuals surrounding, so much so that its inaccurate to talk about a person outside his or her context (2006, p. xvii). She extols the home as the most important of these locations. Home, according to Gallagher ( 2006) is what helps knit up our changing selves into a coherent identity, connect our past to our present and future, organize our days, and carry us forward on the smoot h current of domestic joy ( p. xix). Gallagher explains the history of houses and how the modern concept of home came about. Through the text she explores the home setting, room byroom, explaining how this environment has such a profound impact on human identity. This combining of history and place into a persons identity highlights the need to preserve and protect landmarks, especially historical house museums. Historic buil dings and their interiors are valuable learning tools, holding memories of the past in a tangible form. Kopec (2006) explains that a perceived sense of belongi ng provides a reason for why places are significant to people. When memories and feelings are associated with a location, it permanently ties that place to a sense of self identity. For no setting does this hold truer than for a home, The home environment can be considered in terms of its capacity to nurture and sustain psychological and social processes (Kopec, 2006, p. 130). A persons identity is closely tied to the place where he or she spends the most time, specifically their home. A house does not equal

PAGE 22

22 a home. In his Environmental Psychology (2002) Robert Gifford explains, A house is not a home. A house (or apartment, condo, tipi, or, in general, any residence) is a physical structure. Home is the rich set of evolving cultural, demographic and psychological meanings we attach to that physical structure. (p. 236). Home is then a psychological concept. In this way, historic homes, especially ones that feature original furnishings and personal objects, provide illustrations of past bonds with the individuals who inhabited it. If possible, these exhibits can model personalization by showing which objects were included in the house by the original owners. Also, when these house museums are located in a certain regions they can also become a place of attachment for modern visitors as well. They tie into the community identity, the cultural past of that area, and the museum guest. Historic House Museums Home, as a concept, can have a myriad of meanings ranging from attachment to a specific house or domicile, feeling patriotic about a country, and identifying oneself as a member of the global community. For the United States specifically, according to Butler (2002), all of the nations historic structures feed into the national sense of ident ity, whether intact or destroyed but documented. These structures support feelings of nostalgia and patriotism so well that various agencies, organizations, community groups, public institutions, state and local governments, and individuals have actively pursued the preservation of sites deemed important. The preservation of these buildings and structures often extend to the furnishings and finishes. Butler continues with stating the furnishings used in these sites were often simple, although the savior s frequently sought to re create the character of the interiors, usually through collections associated with the original owners and the house (Butler, 2002, p. 20). These collections are examples of what, in the past, made the house or structure into a home for the people who inhabited it.

PAGE 23

23 As stated by Butler (2002), a historic house museum, like other types of museum still has to conform to the to the American Association of Museums (AAM) code of ethics. The common trait of all museums for the AAM is their unique contribution to the public by collecting, preserving and interpreting the things of this world (American Association of Museums, 2008). In addition, though, a historic house museum centers on the maintenance, care and interpretation of eit her a single, historic residential structure or a complex of structures associated with and including a single residence that serves as the primary focus (Butler, 2002, p. 18). House museums often include artistic and traditional components and more hous e museums are entering the museum community each year. From 1960 to 2002 over six thousand new house museums were organized though frequently, house museums soon fail (Butler, 2002). Each new house museum adds to the trove of historical monuments and landmarks that comprises the nations wealth of historical places. Butler (2002) extols house museums as important cultural institutions: The development of the house museum as an institution crosses many traditional cultural, intellectual, and institutional boundaries. It encompasses issues in the traditional history and decorative arts museum; the historic preservation movement; the development of formal museum training programs; the role of government in museums and society; concepts of popular education for children and for general audiences; gender roles among museum volunteers and professionals; the role of volunteerism and, in particular, patriotic organizations in society; and the place of collectors and antique dealers in establishing and maintaining these institutions (Butler, 2002, p. 18). With such a significant task before historic house museums it is imperative to explore the reasons why and how as a nation, or even a global community, initiatives can begin to safeguard the past. Historic house museums arise when the community they sit in deems the former residences to be of great cultural, historical or social importance to the people of that community. Highlighting the special character of these sites, DEMHIST, the International Council on

PAGE 24

24 M useums International Committee for Historic House Museums, in its 1997 Geneva Convention, identified a historic house museum as the following: The historic buildings, formerly inhabited, now open to the public, showing their original furniture and their c ollections of historic, cultural, national artifacts, preserving the spirit of their illustrious owners and strictly linked with the historic memory of a community, would be considered a special category of Museums (DEMHIST, 1997). Interpreting Historic Ho use Museums (Donnelly, 2002) contains ideas on the need for house museums, their connection to the audience, design and establishment certifications and statutes, funding, content furnishing planning and interpretation period setting, interior and exterior design to restore the property, and the marrying of access and historic preservation. Historic house museums are indeed an adaptive reuse of these historic buildings, turning what was once a home into a museum showcase. This text does not include any insights on how potential emergency situations should be handled within a historic house museum, concentrating only on interpretation, design, and regulations pertaining to house museums. However, this and other sources covering historic house museum operat ions are useful in identifying the different issues that surround this type of museums and provide insight as to factors that may need consideration for their emergency preparedness and recovery efforts. Historic house museums have the unique mission to preserve history as intact as possible. Fixtures, furnishings, artifacts and materials, together in their original context, allow for an indepth look into the lives and social ideals of earlier people. Look and Spennemann (1998) are concerned with the pre servation of what they term historic fabric, or the original materials and objects within an older building. They comment that losing any of this historic material can cause unfixable damage to these buildings. The loss of any historic fabric is deplorable as it is irreplaceable in its own right, as any loss of original fabric will reduce the historical integrity of a structure. It can be repaired but, once damage occurs, the resource is never the same again. (Look & Spennemann, 1998, p. 184).

PAGE 25

25 Since ori ginal materials most often cannot be replaced and, in the best of circumstances, can only be replicated using modern means, their loss creates a serious conundrum for preservationists. Historic house museums provide a glimpse into societys past. These museums, if intact, can provide information on the home life of past people how they lived, worked, and organized the world around them. In his groundbreaking text, Keeping Time William Murtagh touches on the relationship between interiors and preservat ion. He mentions, Excluding museum curators, the professional group with perhaps the most direct connection with the historic room is the American Society of Interior Designers. Historically, the relationship between designers and preservationists has b een an uneasy one at best (Murtagh, 2006, p. 69). While interior designers and decorators have an inclination for disregarding the history of a building when redesigning, preservationists have a propensity for concentrating on the exterior of a historic building and addressing the interior as an afterthought (Murtagh, 2006). Time has begun to change the way historic buildings are being handled. Murtagh (2006) makes this clear as, In recent years, both the historic room and the historic house museum (as well as historic interiors in active use) have benefited from a greater appreciation of scholarship on the part of preservationists and a greater sense of responsibility on the par t of interior designers (p. 71). Historic Preservation Historic buildings are an integral part of the fabric of society. They are tangible, three dimensional history lessons that should be preserved for future posterity. It is difficult to protect these buildings in the face of new development, technology and growing populations. Unfortunately, as explained by the National Trust for Historic Preservation: When historic buildings and neighborhoods are torn down or allowed to deteriorate, a part of our past disappears forever. When that happens, we lose history that helps us know who we are, and we lose opportunities to live and work in the kinds of interesting and attractive surroundings that older buildings can provide. (National Trust for Historic Preservation, 2008, Website ).

PAGE 26

26 Preservationists are often seen as standing in the way of progress and restricting needed growth (Tyler, 2000). What is not often realized is that preservation organizations and individuals have an overwhelming task in protecting everyones heritage. Recently, as mentioned above, the movement to safeguar d the past has prompted preservation organizations to hold conferences for discussing preservation techniques to cope with natural disaster. History, Heritage and Hurricanes was the title for the 2008 Florida Trust for Historic Preservation 30thMuseum Funding Annual St atewide Preservation Conference (Florida Trust for Historic Preservation, 2008). The MayDay initiative, created in 2006 by The Society of American Archivists (SAA), is an annual conference to discuss the natural events of the past year along with new techniques in planning and recovery (Heritage Preservation 2008). In 2007, the Heritage Emergency National Task Force, allied with SAA to help include more types of institutions, museums and historic preservation organizations (Heritage Preservation 2008). Museums receive monetary resources through a variety of means. Two common sources of funding are entrance fees and memberships, with the largest amount of money for museum operation coming from private contributions (American Association of Museums, 2008). Other resources, such as grants, are available on international, national, state, and local levels. The World Monuments Fund offers funding for internationally important endangered sites. Some national awarding agencies include: The Nat ional Park Service, The National Endowment for the Humanities, The United States Department of the Interior, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, The J. Paul Getty Trust, and The Institute of Museum and Library Services. The National Park Service admin isters the grants provided through the Save Americas Treasures program. This is an important grant initiative designed to protect historical structures along with cultural collections and documents considered of national importance:

PAGE 27

27 Established by Execut ive Order in February 1998, Save America's Treasures was originally founded as the centerpiece of the White House National Millennium Commemoration and as a public private partnership that included the White House, the National Park Service and the Nationa l Trust for Historic Preservation Dedicated to the preservation and celebration of America's priceless historic legacy, Save Americas Treasures works to recognize and rescue the enduring symbols of American tradition that define us as a nation. (Save Amer icas Treasures, 2008 Website ). There are also state and local grants; the Florida Division of Historic Resources, a branch of the Florida Department of State, provides matching grants and special category grants to eligible historic sites. A local gran t example for Sarasota County is the John Ringling Towers Historic Preservation Grant administered by the Sarasota County Arts Council. This grant is awarded to nonprofit organizations in Sarasota County for historic rehabilitation (Sarasota County Arts Council, 2009). Grants are awarded through an application process and are therefore not a reliable source of longterm or regular funding. Entrance sales, memberships, government contributions and private donations are more consistent (American Association of Museums, 2008). Resources for Disaster and Museum Management As with funding, there are numerous resources for museum and disaster management information. The following section explores a selection of such resources and what each has to offer; an ext ended list of resources is available in Appendix C. International The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), supplies information about cultural endeavors and a handbook for museum operat ion In its natural science section are general guides to preparedness and mitigation in the form of multimedia applets and downloadable brochures. The site does not offer concrete steps to be followed during a disaster situation. The International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property, (ICCROM), has a risk preparedness manual by Herb Stovel

PAGE 28

28 which provides direction for building a disaster plan. This direction consists of general guidelines gleaned from a study performed by ICCROM on actions ne eded to prepare and recover from a disaster. National The United States Department of the Interior, through the Secretary of the Interiors website, provides mitigation directions and Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties to be followed by kee pers of historic sites and buildings. In addition to post disaster funding, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provides disaster information, maps for each type of North American Disaster, response and recovery information. Preparation informa tion is provided to minimize losses and protect individual families. Individuals can apply for financial assistance after a disaster along with resources for coping with the circumstances. FEMA also provides community resources and relief. The American A ssociation of Museums (AAM), in addition to their code of ethics and best practices for museums, offer standards on disaster and risk management. A segment of this document provides a disclaimer for museums housed in historic structures. The AAM states th at museums housed in historic structures should balance the preservation needs of the building with actions necessary to mitigate risk to people and to the collections housed within the building (American Association of Museums, 2007, p. 3). The associati on does not however, propose any specific directions to this effect maintaining that risk management decisions should suit a museums specific conditions. The AAM also states that, if necessary, the museum should be capable of explaining why its particul ar risk management decisions were made. For all museums, the AAM requires the staff have an emergency preparedness plan documented. This plan should identify and provide directions for handling the risks most applicable to the museums situation. These directions should include evacuation plans for people, task

PAGE 29

29 delegation, protecting collections, evacuating collections and recovering collections. The association recommends training staff and practicing these plans (American Association of Museums, 2007) State There are several resources at the state level. For instance, the state of Florida has organizations such as 1000 Friends of Florida, a not for profit organization f or growth management in Florida. 1000 Friends of Florida offers the publication Disaster Mitigation for Historic Structures: Protection Strategies to improve the integration of historic preservation and disaster preparedness (1000, Friends of Florida, 2008, p. 1). The manual has overviews, goals, case studies, guidelines and mitiga tion options for historic buildings facing a disaster. It gives contact information for local Florida governments and is a source of technical information. It does not, however, provide information or actions aimed at the immediate preparation of an hist oric structure for a storm situation. A second manual, Disaster Planning for Floridas Historic Resources, With Case Studies, explains emergency management programs on the national, state and local levels. It identifies hurricane effects, various agency and state requirements, funding and issues with disaster planning, and resources. The manual gives general guidelines for creating a response network, inventories, and mitigation strategies. It illustrates these issues with community case studies explorin g how sites have coped with different disaster planning experiences. There are no specific steps for disaster mitigation listed in the manual. Another resource in the state of Florida is The Florida Trust for Historic Preservation provides resources and information on Florida heritage sites. The Trust issues preservation awards, lists endangered locations on its website, and provides further resources and historical structure codes. It offers no information about museum management or disaster preparedne ss.

PAGE 30

30 Its mission is to promote preservation in Florida through education, support and property stewardship. The Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources website also provides similar material. The Division is divided into bureaus for Preservation, Archaeology, Museum, Publications and Grants. Thus the information included on the website covers reviews, preservation services, publications, management standards, and funding information for all of these museum and historical fields. Also provided is a link to a Local preservation law and regulation website for historic structure owners. At the local level are practical resources, usually offered by a county or city for specific air purposes. For example, Sarasota County in Florida offers information for an All Hazards Emergency Service on the county website. This site offers evacuation plans and preparation steps for all types of emergency situations. Advice segments are divided by emergency type, along with individual sections for family, business, neighborhood, and senior citizen preparation. Included on the site is information on disaster kits, contact information for local government, and phone numbers of relief agencies. For businesses, a guide to making a disaster plan is available for download. This business guide provides links to sample business disaster plans from disaster preparation sites such as ReadyBusiness.gov, the Institute for Business and Home Safety, the Disaster Contractors Network, FloridaDisaster.org, and FldisasterKit.com. Another local resource for Sarasota County is The Sarasota Alliance for Historic Preservation, which works to preserve and protect historic places around Sarasota. Disaster Mitigation Disasters and Disaster Related Damage As noticed in r ecent years, disasters have been increasing in frequency and strength (Leatherman & Williams, 2008). While forces of nature cannot be controlled, plans can be

PAGE 31

31 implemented to mitigate damage from these natural phenomena and prepare humans to deal with the outcomes of disasters (Spennemann & Look, 1998). According to McDonald (2003) in Introduction to Natural and Manmade Disasters and Their Effects on Buildings, e ach disaster occurrence provides new understanding about how our built environment can be bett er engineered to withstand natural elements and extreme conditions. This understanding comes by finding out why and how structures fail under certain circumstances: A better understanding of how buildings fail in these extreme conditions can enable resear ch and technology to make buildings and other structures safer, more reliable and secure. Governments, architects, engineers, and other allied professions are joining efforts at all levels to examine vulnerabilities of structures, exploring all available avenues with the help of technology in order to identify possible changes in design control mechanisms, improvements on building standards and control standards. (McDonald, 2003, p. 6). Improved standards for new structures, along with innovative ways to preserve historic buildings, emerge from the information learned after each disaster scenario. McDonalds text provides explanation on the mechanics and effects of various natural and manmade disasters. A section on historic building destruction establis hes specific vulnerability issues in regards to each type of disaster. This section also identifies general ideas for preparedness, mitigation and management. The appendices hold factsheets giving directions on what to do to ensure human safety in these d isaster situations. The text mentions that historic buildings should be maintained, documented, and have written disaster plans, but gives no specific steps to take in safeguarding the historic structure or contents in the event of a disaster. Flooding, t ornados, strong winds, and tidal waves in coastal areas generally accompany hurricanes. These storms can last anywhere from eight to twelve days, moving through the Atlantic and over parts of North America and South America. The Atlantic Hurricane Season is defined as the six month period from the first of June to the thirtieth of November (Stubbs, 1990). Because of high wind speeds, debris, and potential flooding during a hurricane, buildings

PAGE 32

32 are extremely vulnerable to damage. While the reviewed liter ature addresses the mechanics and frequencies of disasters and storms, it fails to provide adequate information on managing the destruction they cause. Most damage from hurricanes comes from wind and water; afterwards buildings can become infested with mol d. Circular high speed wind systems (cyclones/ typhoons/ hurricanes, tropical storms and tornados) wreak havoc on historic and archaeological sites. The associated rain causes flooding of low lying places and urban areas (Spennemann & Look, 1991, p. 4) Water damage is usually caused by floodwaters entering the building or rainwater through a faulty roof system. According to Feilden, The hazard of rainfall penetrating a building and causing the structure and contents to decay must not be forgotten a lthough it is entirely preventable by good design and regula r maintenance (Feilden, 1986, p. 17). Thus, good maintenance and restoration of the exterior of historic house museums can prevent much of the interior damage that could occur during a hurricane In the fields of design and historic preservation, disaster is a term that invokes thoughts of fear and the need for considerable planning. Disasters can happen all over the world and at any time, in Protecting the Past from Natural Disasters Nelson (1991) examines two natural disasters: Hurricane Hugo and the Loma Prieta earthquake. According to Nelson, the question is not if, but when and where, disaster will strike next (1991, p. 36). He lists common disaster damage from different natural causes including tornados, floods, fire, hurricanes, and earthquakes. Common hurricane caused building damage includes failing roofs, structural elements, windows, walls and doors from wind and rain, rising waters entering the building from storm surge or rain, m oisture and mildew damage, outer building elements and embellishments being torn off, projectile damage from winddriven objects, even landscape flooding (Nelson,

PAGE 33

33 1991, p. 7778). Natural disaster impacts on historic structures and failures of buildings w hich were not secured properly for hurricane preparedness are touched on as key issues preservationists and designers face. Also, neither Nelson nor Stubbs refers to the effects of a hurricane on the interior components of a building such as the various ar tifacts inside, the wall coverings, the floor finishes, or the ceiling conditions. Preparation and Planning Aside from defining disasters and their effects, Protecting the Past from Natural Disasters, contains insight on human ability to mitigate damage from natural disasters, with or without advance notification. The text highlights how preparation aides in preserving history and human life and rebuilding after a natural disaster. He affirms that the best way to mitigate damage in a disaster event is t o employ planning before the situation arises. Nelson (1991) gives two goals of disaster planning, (1) a contingency plan, designed to take effect when an unforeseen event strikes or is imminent, and (2) longerterm mitigating actions undertaken to minim ize the impact of an anticipate event (p. 65). In brief, this means each historic site needs an emergency plan that can be enacted quickly in the face of impending disaster conditions coupled with a maintenance plan. This historic house maintenance plan would govern the daily operation of the museum. With these procedures in place, it is possible to protect many, if not most, of our historic places from disasters (Nelson, 1991, p. 36). Nelson provides a systematic predisaster planning process model, planning contacts and resources, planning tips, an example plan, and a damage assessment form. He mentions nothing about the impact of staff size and funding on implementing his planning tips. While the human aspect of a disaster event takes precedence over any material damage, planning can provide steps and procedures to alleviate confusion in an emergency situation:

PAGE 34

34 The human costs of natural disasters are tremendous. Disorientation and sever emotional stress impair even the most calm and rational o f decisions makers, often leading to hasty actions that may do further harm to historic places. Planning in advance, for different types of natural events and threats, offers the only sure way of keeping to a minimum the destructive effects of disasters. Without planning, effective solutions for protecting the past from natural disasters will not be developed. (Walter, 1991, p. 6) Planning procedures and preparedness can aid a museum, as well as any other organization, in safeguarding human lives. The faster humans are organized in an emergency, the quicker plans can move toward saving the cultural and architectural treasures that make up historic landmarks. In addition, as Walter (1991) mentions, the steps taken to protect the historic landmarks will, in due course, also provide human safety measures: The first step in emergency preparedness has always been focused rightly on protecting life. But we must ask what additional steps can be taken to protect our cultural and historic landmarks, the features an d characteristics that make Americas communities special places in which to live, grow, and prosper. It is likely that those steps will in the process also promote public safety, by making much more secure the buildings in and around which we spend so much of our time. (Walter, 1991, p. 6) The report by Heritage Preservation, Before and After Disasters: Federal Funding for Cultural Institution, drafted as an outline for obtaining emergency disaster funding from various government agencies, includes a few steps for disaster mitigation. This literature reveals that most disaster efforts are concentrated on clean up instead of mitigation, as evidenced by the statement that In the past 10 years, the hazard management community has made great strides in shift ing the perspective of communities from post disaster clean up to adopting pre disaster mitigation strategies (National Science and Technology Council 2003, p.21). The key to the mitigation of disaster is proper planning and organization. This requires a certain amount of preparation before a disaster ever happens. Hunter (1994) in his article Museum disaster preparedness planning notes that recovery procedures may not have to be fully executed if pre -

PAGE 35

35 disaster mitigation is carried out successfully ( p. 252). Thus, steps toward preparedness are recommended for any historic house museum. Preparation is crucial in withstanding hurricane damage, though numerous texts and studies focus on recovery efforts. Buildings prepared beforehand are often spared the expense of rebuilding. According to Gifford (2002) the value of preparation is shown by the outcome of a study done on building damage caused by hurricanes in Texas and North Carolina. About 70 percent of the damage was the result of poor building code enforcement (p. 397). Preparation, consisting of following building codes and performing regular maintenance, is essential for the protection of the building exterior, structure, interior finishes, and collections in a historic house museum. In Assessi ng Damages Barclay Jones (1986) explains, the vulnerability of objects to damage by the various aspects of hurricanes is to a large extent a function of the vulnerability of the struct ure in which they are housed ( p. 115). The objects Jones refers to e ncompass all items located in a building. Concerning historic house museums, these items include, but are not limited to: period or original artifacts, furniture, non structural adornments, frescos, and artwork. If the structures that house these items ar e compromised, then attention is immediately divided between salvaging and repairing interior elements as well as structural restoration. This article stresses protection of structural and exterior elements but lacks information on steps to safeguard interior spaces when a building envelope is compromised. Most plans and texts encourage immediate action from a disaster response team, but caution that documentation of the damage is essential. To obtain adequate governmental funding and insurance claims, Bef ore and After Disasters advises to begin cleanup and salvage as soon as possible. Dont wait for the insurance agent or adjuster, but remember to fully document the

PAGE 36

36 damage before recovery efforts begin ( Heritage Preservation, 2005, p.21). In Emergency T reatment of Materials, Upton and Pearson (1994) emphasize that post disaster recovery often requires specialists to properly conserve damaged materials. They provide general rules for treating different materials when expert conservators are not available. Having mitigation plans and pre disaster measures in place is advised in their article: In preparation for an emergency it is most important to have a well prepared and practiced disaster plan available and experience has shown that, following a disaster shock and the personal losses by staff often delay or prevent the necessary remedial action being taken in time. Advance preparation for a disaster is therefore the best way to reduce its effects. ( Upton & Pearson, 1994, p. 264). Despite this emphasis, t heir article does not provide specific directions to make a predisaster plan or mitigation steps for disaster effects on historic house museum interiors. Protecting Historic Architecture and Museum Collections from Natural Disaster (J ones, 1986) is a coll ection of articles explaining the need for disaster preparedness. Steps are listed for mitigating damages caused to museums, collections and historic structures by natural disasters. Though most of the articles concentrate on the damages caused by earthqu akes, all disasters are discussed. Key ideas presented include saving objects and collections, dealing with object loss, getting assistance and coping with emergency situations. A key issue of defending collections and interiors from damage is protecting the building structure. In the article Reducing Vulnerability Green (1986) aptly states: One can protect a building without being concerned about contents, but the reverse is not necessarily true; the protection of contents requires that t he building at least survive ( p. 191). Here again, literature strongly suggests that proper structural restoration and maintenance is required. Pre made Disaster Plans Texts, like Steal this Handbook! ( Demeroukas et al, 2001), contain templates or stepby step direc tions for writing museum and collection emergency preparedness plans. Written for

PAGE 37

37 small to mid size museums, this text includes several possible disaster situations: from bomb threats and nuclear explosions to power loss and security. The book consists of three sections: emergency preparedness standards, emergency procedures, and emergency cleanup procedures. Each section contains assorted steps for museum collection preparation and a template plan for every disaster type. Covered for each disaster are steps to reduce damage or develop a plan of action. Specific steps to preserve interior objects are given in this literature, including such procedures as boxing and moving objects to a safe location. For exterior protection the text recommends boarding windows and doors or using shutters. The cleanup procedures are given by item, dealing with collections, historic buildings, and nonhistoric buildings (Demeroukas et al, 2001). The appendices include sample forms for contact trees, location guides, pr ess releases, incident reports, maintenance checklists and evacuation procedures. While there are cleanup procedures for historic buildings, there are no detailed preparedness measures or emergency procedures specific to these structures. The Internationa l Federation of Library Associations and Institutions has a pamphlet, Disaster Planning: Prevention, Preparedness, Response, Recovery, providing basic steps in disaster planning. The document lists natural and manmade disaster causes, disasters effects on archival and library materials, and disaster planning tips. The purpose of this pamphlet is to serve as a guide for writing a disaster plan. According to this guide, a disaster plan consists of four phases: prevention, preparedness, response and recover y. Each phase contains steps to be followed. This pamphlet emphasizes the need for a written plan, supplies, a trained disaster team of staff members, and current documentation of important information. Since it is specifically for library use, it provid es little advice for protecting structural elements or historical artifacts.

PAGE 38

38 Ready Business, an online preparedness tool launched by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security offers a sample business emergency plan. This fill in the blank plan includes eme rgency aid contacts, a command tree for plan implementation, a list of suppliers and contractors, shelter locations, an evacuation plan, tips on safeguarding business information, protection measures for electronic resources, and employee contact informati on. Its purpose is to be a basic plan for business operations during an emergency situation. Summary This significant literature outlines the importance of historic house museums, the necessity for disaster planning, and the design of present disaster pl ans. The following findings and key issues surfaced in the course of this literature review: Places can become a part of a persons cultural identity (c.f. Kopec, 2006). The strongest bonds are created between individuals and their homes ( c.f. Kopec, 2006, Gallagher, 2006, Gifford, 2002).Historic homes are examples of past place attachment (c.f. Donnelly, 2002). Historic house museums can create a connection for modern visitors because they tie into the community identity (c.f. Donnelly, 2002). Histori c structures feed into the national sense of identity (c.f. Butler, 2002). Historic house museums have the difficult task of preserving history as intact as possible because they provide a window into a societys past (c.f. Look & Spennemann, 1998).Histor ic house museums that contain original fixtures, finishes, furnishings and objects are preserved examples of past interior design styles (c.f. Look & Spennemann, 1998). Historic house museums are three dimensional, tangible history lessons that should be preserved for future posterity. When such structures or places are demolished or destroyed, part of history is lost forever (c.f. National Trust for Historic Preservation, 2008). Conferences have been held on preservation techniques to safeguard historic s tructures. In these conferences, new procedures and past failures are discussed to learn how to better cope with disasters (c.f. Florida Trust for Historic Preservation, 2008, Heritage Preservation 2008).

PAGE 39

39 It is difficult to obtain funding for a museum. S ome money comes from entrance fees and memberships with most of the money coming from private contributions. Grants are also relied upon for museum funding (c.f. American Association of Museums). Funding and disaster management resources are available at t he international, national, state and local levels (c.f. The National Park Service, 2008; The National Endowment for the Humanities, 2008; The United States Department of the Interior, 2008; The Institute of Museum and Library Services, 2008; Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2008; Florida Division of Historic Resources, 2008). Having a written emergency preparedness plan, specific to a museums particular circumstances is imperative. The plan should include steps concerning the evacuation of people, and collections, protection and recovery of collections and task delegation. Staff should be trained and practice this plan (c.f. American Association of Museums, 2007). Museums in historic buildings should reconcile the preservation of the building with th e protection of the collection in an emergency plan tailored to their specific conditions. They should be able to support the legitimacy of their choices (c.f. American Association of Museums, 2007). Disasters have been increasing in frequency and strengt h (c.f. Leatherman & Williams, 2008). Hurricanes are specific types of disasters that affect the Gulf and Atlantic Coasts from June to November each year (c.f. Stubbs, 1990). Disaster planning is generally divided into procedures to mitigate damage by pr eparing for the hurricane situation, procedures to respond during the storm, and procedures to recover after the storm has passed (c.f. Nelson, 1991; International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions, 2008). Pre made plans, such as Steal th is Handbook provide templates and directions for writing a museum disaster or emergency plan (c.f. Demeroukas et al, 2001). Preparation manuals contain specific procedures to use as guides in creating disaster preparedness plans (c.f. Demeroukas et al, 2001).

PAGE 40

40 CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODS Research Questions and Hypotheses This exploratory study looked at the composition, basis and implementation of written hurricane disaster preparedness plans to find out how resources available to historic house museums affected their disaster preparation steps. Initial questions that arose from plan examination touched on the impact size, funding, and number of staff have on the disaster preparedness plans: How does the amount or availability of monetary funding influence hurricane disaster preparedness plans? How does museum size affect disaster planning? Size variables in the cases of the two museums examined included physical size of the property, number of buildings in the museum complex, physical size of the historic house(s), value of collection in historic house, museum budget size, amount of property improvement, total number of staff members, number of staff members for the historic house, and number of staff members assigned to disaster plan implementation. The cro sscase analysis of the two case studies aimed at discovering essential guidelines to aid historic house museums of different sizes in creating or revising their own disaster preparedness plans. This c omparative assessment of examined disaster plans led to formulation of the core study questions: Are there essential guidelines common to both large scale house museums and small scale house museums? If essential guidelines are identified, which ones should an optimal standardized plan contain to include all basic procedures required in a disaster situation? Finally, c ould this plan be customized to suit the specific needs of any size museum? The American Association of Museums (AAM) requires all accredited museums to possess a written disaster preparedness plan with certain criteria. Criteria include directions that are museum and collection specific, people evacuation plan, inclusion of all possible threats,

PAGE 41

41 collection protection measures, and responsibility allocation. The staff must be trained, faciliti es inspected, and plans practiced (Ameri can Association of Museums, 2008). Thus, an assumption underlying this study is that these museum complexes, both having historic house museums on property and both being accredited by the AAM, follow similar guidel ines in hurricane preparedness based on property type, regardless of funding, staff, size, and collection value. Therefore, staff, funding, and physical size affect the distribution and types of actions, as each museum relies on the resources it has avail able to accomplish the same task of preparing its site for a storm while collection value affects the prioritizing scheme of the plans. Case Study Strategy This is a qualitative, multiple case study of the written disaster plan documents of two Sarasota hi storic house museums concerning their composition, their basis, their implementation, and the effects funding, staff and museum attributes have on them. Robert Yin (2003) defines a case study as an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenom enon within its reallife context especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident ( p. 13). Thus, the purpose of employing case studies for research is to find information on individual, group, organizational, social political, and related phenomena (Yin, 2003, p. 1). Its value as a research strategy is in providing a method for the researcher to collect holistic and characteristic data within the subjects original context. According to Yin, how or why questi ons lend themselves to exploratory research. For exploratory studies the favored research approaches are case studies, experiments or histories. Of these three approach types, the case study technique is more desirable when looking at contemporary events specifically those in which the subjects behavior cannot be manipulated for study. A research plan is considered to possess a multiplecase design when more than one complete case study is completed and evaluated. Single case study design is chosen to represent critical cases, extreme or unique

PAGE 42

42 cases, representative or typical cases, or when the case serves a revelatory or longitudinal purpose. In contrast, a multiple case study is performed to demonstrate replication. Multiple case studies follow replication, not sampling, logic meaning that the cases are expected to replicate a significant finding (Yin, 2003). The exploratory nature of this research allows for the comparison of two case studies that can elicit preliminary findings susceptible of being cor roborated later via lengthier multiple case studies Th is study followed Robert Yins methodology, generally considered the benchmark for case study research. Participants were selected to predict contrasting results for predictable reasons, an approach known as a theoretical replication (Yin, 2003, p. 47). The aim is that discoveries in all of the case studies support the proposed contrasts. As maintained by Yin (2003), this support adds to the validity of the research more than solely relyi ng on the results of a single case study. During the comparison of completed case studies, replication results must be discussed to provide the reasons behind the predicted outcomes (Yin, 2003). Scope of the Study The research concentrated on actions cont ained within each plan along with the particulars of plan implementation for two house museums in the coastal area of Sarasota Florida. The study was limited to examination of current disaster plan documents, observations of the physical museum profile, i nterview and survey responses and concept diagramming. Inquiry was made into what foundation articles, documents, or individuals were drawn from in plan writing. This multiple case study analyzed the hurricane plans from two house museums of different scales: small versus large. The terms small and large did not only denote physical size but how much staff, resources, and funding were available to the participating museums. There is no agreement on what constitutes a small museum with the American A ssociation of Museums and the Institute of Museum and Library Services offering varying opinions. The former makes the

PAGE 43

43 cutoff at a budget of less than $250,000 and the latter with a cutoff of less than $350,000 (Chew, 2002). In each case budget is the only characteristic defining a museum as large or small. According to the American Association of State and Local History (2005), though these miniscule budget amounts are usually the defining factors, other qualities, such as size, collection, and staff c an also categorize a museum as being small. For this study, several of these attributes were taken into consideration including property and building size, budget size, collection value, and number of staff members. In respect to this research a small museum possessed a budget under $999.999, less than thirty full time staff members and a less valuable, donated collection while a large museum had a budget of $1 million or more more than thirty full time staff members with a more valuable original c ollection Both historic house museum complexes were located in the same coastal region/geographical area, Sarasota County, Florida, so as to have been hit or damaged by the same hurricanes and subjected to similar weather and climatic conditions. Disas ter Preparedness Plan Case Studies The cases in this study looked at the influence monetary funding amounts or availability had on hurricane disaster preparedness plans and how museum size affected disaster planning. During data collection, the participat ing museums curators were contacted for information. Of the museum staff members that could have given information on their institutional disaster preparedness plans, the curators were selected to be respondents. They were chosen because of their positi on as historic house caretakers. This gave them hands on interaction and specific knowledge about the interiors and exteriors of the structures. Their responses provided indepth information but subjected the research schedule to the availability of the c urators and museum access. After an initial site visit to gain precursory information about the museums site, facilities, and collection, examination of the museums hurricane plan was requested. The

PAGE 44

44 curators were then asked to respond to a short survey about their institutions demographics and the steps in its hurricane preparedness plan. An interview was conducted to clarify survey answers and garner additional information. The information was divided into museum profiling characteristics, property improvements, plan implementation information, plan basis, and the current written disaster plan content analysis. This data was analyzed to find out how the size variables influenced the disaster preparedness plans and find guidelines within the written plan documents. The data from both case studies were compared to obtain cross case conclusions on how budget and museum size affected each museums guidelines. Participants Two case studies were included in this research with each museum an individual cas e study. The participating museums were Historic Spanish Point, located in Osprey, Florida and The John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art: The C dZan Mansion located in Sarasota, Florida. These participating museums were chosen under the following consi derations: both are historic site museum complexes incorporating one or more historic houses. The museums are both are located in West Central Florida, specifically in Sarasota County, thus their geographic proximity subjects them to similar environmental conditions and climatic situations. They exhibit differences in governance types, budget size, property area, building size and number of staff. Both museums have written disaster plans which makes content examination possible and were willing to partic ipate in the study, which makes them accessible for research. The study was conducted outside of hurricane season so as not to interfere with hurricane preparation at the museums and to facilitate a higher response rate. Process The sources of information for each study included primary source research, involving human respondents, and secondary source research, consisting of the physical museum settings

PAGE 45

45 and plan documents. The specific research strategies employed in this study included site visits, diagramming, content analysis of written material, questionnaires and protocol driven structured interviews with the historic house curators. The following sections provide additional detail on how these methods were utilized to gain information about the par ticipants and their hurricane disaster preparedness plans. Site visits The first stage of data collection involved initial site visits to obtain direct experiential information about each museum. During each site visit, photographs were taken to document the physical setting of the museum complexes and historic house structures. These photographs were useful when analyzing the disaster plans. They provided visual illustrations of concepts and locations mentioned in the written plan documents. Also, an initial walk through of each historic house museum was conducted. Becoming familiar with the structures in the plan was imperative for understanding the steps and procedures these documents outline. All of this provided information on the physical size of the museum to ascertain its impact on the hurricane disaster preparedness plan. Data about retrofitting and rehabilitation of the historic houses was also documented during these site visits. During a site visit at the Ringling Museum of Art in Novembe r 2008, the C dZan Mansion curator provided a tour of the structure while explaining their hurricane steps in each space. Docents provided information about their experience at the mansion. At Historic Spanish Point in February 2009, a walkthrough of each accessible historic house was performed. Docents were able to point out where the buildings had been retrofitted. Diagramming To better understand the disaster preparedness processes of the participant museums steps, actions and their order flow charts were produced. A flow chart is a graphical representation of a process or program. It is a method of documenting a process flow, commonly

PAGE 46

46 used in computer programming and business process mapping (Alred, Brusaw, Oliu, 2008). These diagrams use st andard symbols, labeled for each step or action in the process. A standard flow or direction is always followed, either top to bottom or left to right, depending on the chart. (Alred, Brusaw, Oliu, 2008). For this research, flow charts were used in diagr amming the current plan action processes to illustrate how the plans currently work. After the content analysis was performed, more flow charts were created to illustrate the processes as adapted from the content analysis results. In the cross case exami nation, the commonality and difference analysis of the museum disaster preparedness processes was transl ated into this type of graphic representation. This diagramming aided in understanding the relationships between the plan actions, then again with the influence museum data had on the plan processes. The flow charts in this study used eight standard symbols (Figure 31). Figure 31. Flow chart legend. The symbols used for the flow charts in this study included terminator points, which are the start and stop points in the processes. The rectangular process shapes, with pointed corners, illustrated actions. The process symbols with rounded corners denoted an action that was an alternate option to the normal process. Document shapes signified when the illustrated step was

PAGE 47

47 a document instead of an action. Data symbols represented profiling information collected on the museums. Routine symbols served to mark where a sub process was performed. These sub processes where then documented within a separate flow chart. Delay symbols designated time oriented waiting periods. Circular connector symbols were used when processes were closely related. Content analysis of written plans Secondary source research, in the form of a content analysis of disaster polic ies was a fundamental part of the case study. Careful examination of these documents enhanced the knowledge of actions and procedures concerning the hurricane disaster situations used at each museum. In A Practical Guide to Behavior Research, Sommer & So mmer (2002) defined content analysis as a technique for systematically describing the form [i.e. structure] and content of written or spoken material ( p. 177). Content consists of any specific topics or themes in the material while structure refers to f orm (Sommer & Sommer, 2002, p. 178). During the data collection from the disaster plans, an inquiry was made into the base reference sources consulted for each plan. Base sources included any pre made plans, disaster planning reference books, or advis ors. The structure of each written plan provided information on the accessibility and ease of use of the plans while the content showed specific actions for disaster preparedness and mitigation. The content analysis in this study also looked for reoccurr ing themes in each disaster plan. This document examination data was used to formulate survey and interview questions. The comparison of content analyses of the two documents during the final crosscase examination highlighted the commonalities and diffe rences in the essential guidelines of the plans.

PAGE 48

48 Questionnaires In next phase of data collection questionnaires were administered to the respondents for the historic house museums to inquire about museum demographics and the general context for each disa ster preparedness plan. The first part of these surveys inquired about characteristics to aid in fitting each museum to an economic and size profile. The categories were based on the latest available American Association of Museums Accreditation Program annual statistics (AAM, 2008) which included self reported data from accredited and applicant museums. These statistics offer categories for various types of museums consisting of budget size, governance type, number of staff, and geographic distribution by region. These categories were modified to fit the objectives for this study, namely to obtain economic profiling data for each institution. The second half of the survey questions aimed to garner information on the hurricane disaster plan for each of the museums (Appendix A). Topics included the time frame for plan implementation, plan document revision frequency, plan document content, structural maintenance for hurricane sustainability, and individuals involved in the planning process. This inform ation was used to further understand the mechanics and implementation behind the plan and answer any questions that arose during the document content analysis. Both museums returned the completed questionnaires. Interviews Another research step entailed s tructured interviews with the respondents at both house museums ( Appendix B). The interviews purpose was to answer any questions that surfaced during the survey analysis stage and discuss the disaster preparedness plans. These interviews were made up of predetermined, open ended questions. Questions revealed which procedures have worked and which the staff believes should be changed. Maintenance and property improvements were discussed along with possible hurricane effects on the historic buildings.

PAGE 49

49 Other questions broached topics including methods and schedule followed in the disaster plan along with revisions done to the written documents. The interview was also used to confirm information on the foundations of the plan: the refinement of prior plans, the aid of consultants in plan conception, or the use of a basic emergency plan or outline. Information on retrofitting the structures and past building damage was also garnered. Chain of evidence These case studies included multiple sources of evidence from individuals, observations and documents. Therefore, as indicated by Yin (2003) a chain of evidence was established and data was crossreferenced. To secure this chain of evidence, all documents, interviews and information were carefully docum ented and cited. Also, the time, place, and date of collection was noted along with the source of the data. Cross referencing of data in the analysis phase provided insight on the inception, format, and feasibility of use for these disaster plans. Ethical Considerations: IRB Explanation and Exemption The University of Florida Institutional Review Board (IRB) presides over research conducted by students and faculty involving human subjects. Its purpose is to ensure that their welfare and rights are protected as mandated by federal regulations (UF IRB 2008, Website ). IRB material for this research, including informed consent forms, protocol form, survey and interview questions, was submitted to the University of Florida IRB02 office. That review determ ined to exempt this study from IRB approval on the grounds that the examined subjects were the historic house museums and their hurricane preparedness plans. No personal information about the staff was collected thus this study would not constitute an inv asion of their privacy.

PAGE 50

50 Summary This study is a qualitative, multiple case study of current hurricane disaster preparedness methods from two Sarasota historic house museums. The identified participants are The John and Mable Ringling Museum of Arts C d Zan Mansion and Historic Spanish Point. These participants exhibited similar and contrasting features. They were chosen as case studies to provide contrasting results that might confirm predicted reasons. The case study results aimed at finding how and w hy variables such as funding and size affected hurricane preparedness plans. A second goal was to discover essential guidelines to aid historic house museum staff members in writing or updating their own disaster plan. The research utilized multiple meth ods of data collection and established a chain of evidence to achieve maximum validity. These methods consisted of observational site visits, concept diagramming, document content analysis, questionnaires and interviews. The curators of these participati ng museums contributed information and responses to the questionnaires and interviews. After both cases studies were completed, a crosscase analysis was performed to identify essential guidelines for hurricane preparation.

PAGE 51

51 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS The site visit observations, concept diagramming, disaster plan content analysis, surveys and interviews at Historic Spanish Point and the John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art provided information on the building preparation methods and disaster plan composition in r espect to the museums size differences. A cross case examination was employed to explore for common actions that both museums used to prepare and protect their structure against hurricane damage. These commonalities were drawn on to investigate the possibility of forming a standardized, but customizable, plan that smaller house museums could utilize against future storm scenarios. The John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art: C dZan Mansion Museum Profile The John and Mable Museum of Art is located in S arasota, Florida. The C dZan Mansion, the historic house in the museum complex, was governed by the Florida Department of State until 2000 (Groft & Weeks, 2004). The entire museum is now operated by Florida State University and the Ringling Center for t he Cultural Arts (John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art, 2008). It is accredited by the American Association of Museums (AAM) and was listed on the National Register of Historic P laces in 1982 as the Caples Ringlings Estates Historic District (Nationa l Register Information System, 2008). The structures on the sixtysix acre museum property include the C dZan Mansion, the Caretakers Cottage, the Circus Museum, the Circus Museums Tibbals Learning Center, the Banyan Caf, the Art Museum ( Figures 4 1, 4 2, and 43), the Visitors Pavilion, the C dZan Gatehouse, and the Education Conservation Complex Art Library. The Ringling Center for the Cultural Arts incorporates the Ringling Museums, the Asolo Center for the Performing Arts and

PAGE 52

52 the Florida State University/ Sarasota Dance School. These structures are also located in the complex (FSU Ringling Center for the Cultural Arts, 2004). According to the Review of State Owned Cultural Properties by the Florida Legislature Office of Program Policy Analysi s and Government Accountability, during the 19951996 fiscal year the museums operating cost was $6.5 million. It was supported by two million dollars in state funds with the rest of the monetary provisions coming from admission proceeds, concession sales, membership fees, gifts and investments. The state also contributed $1.3 million for mansion restoration. In the 1996 1997 fiscal year, the State of Florida gave the museum $3.7 million divided into $1.8 million for staff salaries and benefits, $1.2 m illion for renovations, $200,000 for the Ringling Art Acquisition, Restoration, and Conservation Trust Fund, and $548,597 in two grants from the Department of State. During the five years leading up to 1997, the Ringling Museum was given $12.6 million by t he State of Florida (Florida Legislature, Report No. 9671, 1997). The monetary funding requested for each year by the mansion staff depends on the type of projects that are planned. In 2008, $100,000 was awarded for that years planned mansion endeavors and FEMA awarded $300,000 for dock repairs. For the entire museum there are over two hundred full time staff members. Between six and ten of those full time staff are assigned solely to the C dZan Mansion (McCarty, R., personal communication, March 27 2009). These budget and size characteristics qualified The John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art to be designated as a large museum for this study. Built for John and Mable Ringling, the C dZan Mansion was finished in 1926 and is situated on Sarasota Bay. This mansion presented a unique research opportunity because it contains original Ringling familial objects. John and Mable Ringling bought many of the items from the estates of Vincent Astor and Jay Gould (Hupp & Stewart, 1995). Included with thes e

PAGE 53

53 elaborate, original furnishings are frescos and murals that have been preserved as part of the museums collection (Hupp & Stewart, 1995). The mansion of fortyone rooms and fifteen baths has a square footage exceeding 36,000square f ee t. The exterior t errace overlooking Sarasota Bay is 8,000 square f eet (Scalera, 2006). Since the terrace abuts the waterfront, a potential situation of floodwater infiltration of the mansion arises (Figure 4 4). Because of the immense monetary and historical value of the original artifacts, art, and frescos painted and adhered to the structure, the C dZan senior staff have organized and implemented their own specialized hurricane plan. Property Improvements: Retrofitting and Habitat Alterations Restoration on the C d Zan Mansion began in 1993. Made possible by State grants and private donations, it evolved into a six year, $15 million dollar project (Scalera, 2006, p. v). The restoration included three phases during which the structure, mechanical systems, and furni shings were repaired and refurbished. In 1999, the Ringling Museum of Art was awarded a federal Save Americas Treasures grant in the amount of $353, 147 to conserve the fine art and the decorative surface finishes of interior rooms in the mansion (Save Americas Treasures, 2008). Some nonhistorical additions were made to the structure including acrylic panels over the courtyard skylight. These panels were installed to protect the original stained glass from sun fading and projectile damage (Figures 45 and 4 6). The tile roofing systems on the mansion and cottage were replaced during restoration with new systems, engineered and des igned to survive winds over 140 miles p er hour (Tomasino & Associates, 2002). In addition to the restoration, the mansi on received upgrades specifically for protection from the elements. In 2008, a film developed by the 3M company was applied to the mansion windows. This film provides ninetynine percent UV ray protection while strengthening the panes and preventing shat tering. That same year, a ninety five feet tall

PAGE 54

54 Norfolk Pine tree that had previously stood in front of the mansion was removed. It posed a threat since it could have fallen and damaged the structure during storm force winds. The tree had held a lightni ng rod, which was subsequently placed atop the C dZan tower. The mansion undergoes continual maintenance and restoration of minor issues because, if a building is not maintained, the disaster plan is useless (McCarty, R., personal communication, Novem ber 3, 2008). This maintenance encompasses such repairs as grout touch up, as needed, for the exterior terra cotta embellishments. Past storm damage that has caused the need for restoration or repairs often included water damage. During one storm, water pooling on the second story balcony made its way through the doors. It moved through the floor and caused damage to the ballroom ceiling. A different water damage incident, in the 1980s, involved the flooding of the mansion basement. In yet another storm, marble from the lower dock was torn off. This dock was restored in 2008. Plan Implementation The Ringling Museum of Art has a chain of command for hurricane plan implementation. At the top is an all campus Emergency Coordinator followed by the Senior Management Leader, and then the Team Leader. Under the Team Leader are Team Coordinators for each building on campus. Every Team Coordinator has his or her team of staff members to oversee. The museum works in conjunction with Sarasota County official s to prepare for a disaster, closing the complex as public buildings are mandated closed. As the county reopens, so does the museum. The museums chief of security watches these Sarasota County actions, and then issues orders to the museum teams. After this county direction is received, the teams prepare the museum structures for an impending storm in accordance with a priority listing where the C dZan mansion is the first building addressed because of its waterfront location. To prepare the museum f or a disaster it takes three days. The buildings are prepared A command center is

PAGE 55

55 established in the Education Building to organize and keep track of all preparation teams, which all carry radios to call back to this central bank. Before each hurricane season, trial runs are performed by the preparation teams to confirm the proper working of the chain of command and the plan execution. Emergency supplies are refilled or replaced every year, including such things as sandbags and flashlights. The mansion s disaster team takes two days to complete the plan steps. Within the first day the mansion is prepared and the second day is used to work on the final touches. The individuals in charge of C dZan plan implementation are as follows, listed by title: Curator of C dZan Mansion, Re gistrar, Assistant Registrar, Cons ervator, and Assistant Conservator. If heavier items need to be moved two additional Building Services personnel are requested to aid. The curator limits the number of individuals who can hel p to maintain control of the situation. Too many people helping can confuse the process and items may be misplaced. Volunteers are never used at the mansion. The museum has a large enough staff and prefers to rely on employees since only highly trained staff members are allowed to handle the collection objects. The registrar staff members fill out move sheets for each object as it is relocated. The team proceeds room byroom, beginning in the central court then working their way outward and upstairs. In the court, carpets are rolled up and furniture pushed to the middle of the room. Blankets are placed under the piano and it is moved away from the windows. Everything is covered with plastic to prevent water damage, though there has been no water intr usion since the addition of the acrylic panels. These types of actions are performed in every space within the mansion. Since it has gone through extensive restoration, the structure would survive a storm but these steps must be taken to protect the objec ts within. There exist objects too large to be moved

PAGE 56

56 and others that are too fragile. Moving these objects could subject them to damage. These types of objects, such as the ballroom furniture, are pushed toward the interior walls or to the center of the rooms. Priority choices are made by the curator of which items to move to an upstairs vault, with paintings and exposed small objects being first. Some objects, because of the number of them or their size, are secured where they are because their relocation would be too time consuming. The venetian blinds on most of the 180 windows in the mansion are closed to stop projectiles from entering. The outside of the mansion is never boarded up a common safeguarding strategy because drilling holes in the f aade to hang the boards would affect the structures historical integrity. The grounds department moves or ties down all exterior objects to prevent projectiles. Items such as the terrace umbrellas and stands are moved to storage areas offsite. The man sion doors and Art Museum basement openings are sandbagged to prevent water intrusion. After the mansion is secured, the same team moves on to prepare the Art Museum. This prioritizing, moving, and preparing process is repeated in the Art Museum. After the last phase of preparation is completed, staff members are required to leave the museum campus. Because of the mansions proximity to Sarasota Bay, the only person permitted into the building after the execution of the last plan phase is the curator. D ue to county procedure, the museum grounds may close after or reopen before the mansion is completely secured. Even so, visitors are not allowed into the mansion during the Yellow, Red, or Recovery phases because of security reasons keeping track of Ringling familial collection pieces is a top priority. During the movement of items, visitors walking though the building have the potential of causing staff members to lose track of object placement (McCarty, R., personal communication, March 27, 2008).

PAGE 57

57 T o summarize, when a storm is approaching the museum closes as per Sarasota County direction. Emergency teams are contacted who perform the Yellow and Red phases of the disaster plan moving items and protecting the building. Furniture is repositioned awa y from windows and everything is covered in plastic. Employees are then evacuated from the premises until the storm has passed. Once the storm is over, employees return to the site and put the objects and furniture back into their original positions. The museum is then reopened to visitors, achieving normal operations (Figure 47). Plan Basis and Revisions The C dZan mansion plan was first written in 1980 and has been revised every April with new furniture or item locations. Since pieces are not often moved within the mansion, the plan has not varied much since creation. The mansion curator wrote the disaster plan to safeguard the objects within in a hurricane scenario. Every other building in the complex also has an individual plan, written by the person in charge of that structure. The museum plan has been compared to plans of other historic house museums. Many other museums have a similar water front situation and necessary or new techniques are shared with them creating a form of validation syst em. Member s of the American Association of Museums, such as the Ringling Museum of Art, help one another with disaster plan information. (McCarty, R., personal communication, March 27, 2009). Current Hurricane Plan Structure The information attained during the initial disaster plan analysis revealed that the mansion plan was relatively simple. It is incorporated into the John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art plan along with individual plan processes for each of the campus structures. The plans toge ther form a whole cohesive protocol for the entire museum. This comprehensive hurricane plan was

PAGE 58

58 written specifically to protect the complex against tropical cyclone damage. There are no other disaster or emergency situation s covered by this document. T his hurricane plan contains sensitive information about object locations, security measures and sensitive employee information; therefore, it is confidential. For this reason, the plan is only accessible to senior staff members and those involved in plan implementation. The Chief of Security, disaster team members, and each head of building has his or her own copy of the museums hurricane plan. The plan binder also contains a structuring table so that staff members know whom they are report ing to during a natural disaster situation. Within the museum plan there is a priority method in addressing the buildings. Each building has its own preparation process incorporating emergency strategies along with a list of team members and checklists of measures to b e taken. Included with the plans is an employee contact tree that outlines the chain of command for the entire complex Salvage operations and a vital records plan are provided in case recovery processes are needed to secure the site after a storm scenar io (Figure 4 8). Content s ummary The mansion hurricane emergency plan includes a contact tree of individuals to be called in the event of a hurricane situation. To supplement the contact tree are employee emergency contact forms with phone and address inf ormation along with an alternate individual to call in a crisis. Following this is a sandbagging map, two separate checklists, the hurricane plan steps relocation logs, location floor plans, and mansion s ecurity measures. One checklist is for the threat of wind and rain, the other for a storm surge threat. The plan is broken down into steps by phases. The first phase is a preparation phase, to be implemented before a storm arrives. This phase involves informing the staff of the situation and initial ac tions such as sandbagging the building. The second phase is called a yellow alert phase. This phase outlines the room byroom requirements including the moving of furniture and artifacts away from windows, leaving

PAGE 59

59 heavier items in their respective rooms and relocating more expensive and smaller items to the vault or playroom on the third level. The red alert phase is aimed at human safety. This phase is executed during the storms imminent approach to make sure visitors and all non essential staff mem bers are off the premises and that essential staff members are in safe locations. The last phase is the recovery phase for implementation after the storm has passed During the last phase site access is regained, items are returned to their original loc ations and the museum is opened to resume normal operations (Figure 4 9) The hurricane plan is divided into actions by room. In preparation for a storm situation most interior items are relocated to a designated safe place (Figure 4 10). Anything that cannot be relocated is moved away from the windows and covered in plastic, such as the credenza in Figure 411. Anything breakable that could be knocked down during a storm is placed as low in the room as possible, off of stands, tables or shelves and onto the floor or the carpet. Since the C dZan Mansion sits directly on Sarasota Bay, the threat of flood always accompanies a hurricane. Storm surges can easily get high enough to breach the exterior patio. The sandbagging map indicates where sandbags should be placed, and the number of bags that should be used in each location. Water damage is a big threat, so steps are taken to prevent water from getting to any items in the mansion. Plastic is employed to cover objects to help protect them from wate r damage in case the structural envelope is opened. Smaller objects and important art is relocated to a storage area on the third level that has no window access. This prevents water from outside damaging the objects. Content Analysis Categories The co ntent analysis of the hurricane preparedness plan looked for any reoccurring themes in the steps and actions within the document. This content analysis showed that the practical

PAGE 60

60 actions and information contained in the plan fit into six categories. The c ategories related to the key action or verbs contained in the different steps or instructions and have been designated as: Supply, Recover, Communicate, Relocate, Organize, and Secure. These were underlying actiondriven guidelines different from the trad itional sections of mitigation, response and recovery into which the plan is currently divided. The Supply category incorporated any mention of supplies, or readying specialized equipment for the disaster situation. These supplies included emergency equipment, temperature and humidity monitors, fans dehumidifiers, and wet vacuums. Assessing damage, salvaging measures, monitoring instructions and after storm documentation were grouped under the Recover category. To recover after a storm, objects and furni ture have to be returned to their proper locations and normal operations restored. Actions that directed communication fell into the Communicate category. These were any types of actions or material related to contacting employees, giving directions, providing access to plan, informing public and staff, reviewing procedures, notifying agencies or security, or coordinating activities. The category Relocate identified any steps taken to move artifacts, art and furniture or evacuate people and personnel. In the event of a disaster situation, all visitors and nonessential personnel are evacuated from the site, furniture and artwork are relocated, and items are moved away from windows and doors. All organizational actions and items were assigned to the Orga nize category. These consisted of documentation, maps, floor plans, contact trees, checklists, relocation/move sheets, tabs, phases, and progression methods. Finally, all measures for covering items, anchoring large furniture or objects, fortifying openi ngs or sandbagging doorways were grouped under the Secure category. Closing all windows, doors, and blinds are also included in this grouping. Table 41 aids in illustrating what actions fell into each category.

PAGE 61

61 Most of the actions occupied the Secure category, which incorporated 23.26% of the total plan actions. The Organize category had the second most actions at 20.4%. Relocate and Communicate, came next and were almost equal in number of actions, having 17.98% and 17.13% respectively. Recover, 17.98%, and Supply, 9.39%, had the least amount of actions. The content analysis percentage distribution of actions to essential guideline categories is shown in Figure 4 12. Model The weight of each category in the disaster preparedness plan was translated into a relationship model to reveal the structure of the plan as well as the relative contribution of each category to the disaster preparedness plan. The plan relationship m odel is shown in Figure 413. Organize, second largest category, and Communicate a re directly tied together. Together they make up 37.53% of the actions in the plan. These two categories influence the Secure, Relocate and Recover categories. Secure and Relocate, together 41.24% of total action in plan, are closely connected and also both affect Recover as well. Each category is dependent on specific required supplies; this causes Supply to be distributed among all of the other categories in practice. This disaster plan model assures museum staff members little need for recovery tim e, effort, or cost in having the manpower and resources necessary to carry out a large scale secure andrelocate operation, thus avoiding most possible damage. Historic Spanish Point Museum Profile Historic Spanish Point is located in Osprey, Florida. The site is owned and administered by the Gulf Coast Heritage Association, Inc, a private, not for profit organization (Historic Spanish Point, 2008). This historic museum complex has accreditation by the American Association of Museums. In 1976, it becam e the first site to be listed on the National Register of Historic

PAGE 62

62 Places for Sarasota County (Historic Spanish Point, 2008). The heirs of Mrs. Potter Palmer donated the site in 1980 and in 1982 the area was opened to the public. (Historic Spanish Point, Annual Report 2007, 2008). The complex, comprising 30 acres of Florida shoreline and mangroves, includes three historic houses: two pioneer homes, Guptill House (1901) ( Figure 414 ) and White Cottage (1884) along with Point Cottage. Point Cottage was constructed around 1931 by Chicago socialite, Mrs. Bertha Matilda Honore Palmer, along with several additional historic structures including Marys Chapel and Acorn Cottage (Figure 415) (Historic Spanish Point, 2008). Historic Spanish Point has a budget s ize of between $500,000 and $999,999 (Kocian, H., personal communication, February 6, 2009). Museum support is assisted by grant funds. The museum was the 20022003 recipient of a $19,954 grant awarded by the State of Florida Division of Cultural Affairs (Florida Legislature Report No.0268, 2002). In 2007, Historic Spanish Point received numerous grants: $148, 500 from the Institute of Museum and Library Services, $31,009 from the State of Florida, Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, Historical Museums Grantin Aid Program, and $40,000 from Sarasota County. The museum was also awarded over $75,000 in various other grants that year (Historic Spanish Point, Annual Report 2007, 2008). There are six to fifteen full time staff members who work at the museum with one to five of them working specifically with the historic houses (Kocian, H., personal communication, February 6, 2009). Despite having multiple structures on site, due to a modest budget and staff size Historic Spanish Point fit s into the designation of a small museum for this study. This museum presents a fascinating picture of Florida history by containing nine structures from different points in the states past. The scope of the museum covers prehistoric Florida,

PAGE 63

63 with its en closed Native American midden archaeological site, to pioneer times when the s tate was just beginning to grow up to the boom of the roaring 1920s with the introduction of sunseeking people from the northern states. The structures, of immense historical value to the public for historical learning purposes, have been restored each to their specific time of historical significance. Period artifacts and furnishings have been added through collection donations and loans. Though they are not original to the inhabitants of these houses, the artifacts help illustrate how the houses might have looked and functioned in the past. T he Guptill House does have a piano that belonged to the pioneers who built the house. These collections, much of which is on loan from private individuals, require extra care because of their personal value to the donors. In an effort to keep these structures and artifacts safe during a crisis situation the Historic Spanish Point staff has written and implemented an all encompassing emerg ency plan. All of the structures in Historic Spanish Point are situated within view of the waterfront, but either elevation or distance protects each from storm surge and flooding, refer to Figures 416 and 417 showing White Cottage and its relation to Little Sarasota Bay. The vegetation and mangroves that grow along the coastline of the property provide added protection. The main part of the property is situated within South Jetty Park. Figure 4 18 shows an aerial view of the museum further illustrati ng the relation between the property and the surrounding environment. Property Improvements: Retrofitting and Habitat Alterations Since 1982, over $4 million has been spent on learning exhibits and restoring the historic property. The houses have been r estored to their period of historical signif icance (Historic Spanish Point, 2008, Annual Report 2007). In addition to the restoration, there are other actions taken by staff to safeguard these historic buildings. The Site Horticulturalist oversees the ex terior operations. Particular attention is given to the cultural landscape of large and older trees on the site to discover weakness and possible damage. These trees have the possibility of falling

PAGE 64

64 and harming the historic structures. Limbs can also fal l off the trees becoming projectiles. Trimming, pruning, or removal of these plants helps to prevent storm related damage to structures or people. Also, there is a primary storage facility on site for collections, which is shuttered against storm damage. Acrylic storm windows have been added on the outside of the original windows at the Visitors Center and Guptill House to provide added protection against wind and projectiles (Kocian, H., personal communication, February 6, 2009). Plan Implementation Sinc e the plan includes multiple emergency situations, plan implementation depends on the type of situation the staff encounters. Definitive direction always comes from the Executive Director. Staff follows this lead when dealing in all situations. Dependin g on the situation, outside resources are contacted. For example, in a medical emergency, the staff enlists the aid of local medical emergency crews; in a security situation, local police authorities are called in to help. For a natural disaster situatio n, since advanced warning is usually available, the museum staff performs their own site preparation measures. To execute the disaster plan for Historic Spanish Point in a hurricane situation it takes one to three days with six to ten staff members involved for the entire museum. The chain of command begins with the Executive Director who coordinates all preparation actions. All senior staff members have detailed responsibilities during a natural disaster preparation situation though all staff members participate in preparation. The Administrative Assistant informs outside individuals, such as the Sheriffs Department of the site closing while taking care of final records. The Program Director and Marketing Coordinator takes care of informing the medi a and tours of site closings and also securing educational resources. The visitor center administration staff secures all equipment and files for that building. All additional staff

PAGE 65

65 members secure their particular working area. Volunteers if available a re allowed to help under the direction of the three main staff members. Under the direction of the Executive Director the task performing plan actions concerning the historic structures falls to three main people, The major responsibility for the physic al site, grounds, buildings, structures, and collections falls to the Site Superintendent, Site Horticulturalist and Curator. For instance, the curator secures the buildings interiors and collections such as the piano and period furniture in the Guptill House (Fi gures 4 19, 4 20, and 421). The site horticulturalist secures all outdoor items. If necessary, service providers, such as a tree pruning services, are ca lled in to aid. Before a storm, mitigating measures are taken. These measures involve cont inual activities to reduce hazards around the museum site. Year round preparation measures also include training staff members on emergency procedures and making sure resources, equipment and supplies are up to date. W hen a storm has been identified the museum continues normal operations while monitoring weather conditions visitors are informed of the imminent situation, and staff arrange for plan implementation. Once a hurricane warning has been declared, the museum closes to the public and prepares t he site. Records and equipment are secured in the offices and visitor center. In the exhibits, hanging pictures are removed from the walls and small items are boxed. Furniture is moved towards the middle of the structure, away from the windows. After t hese steps, the buildings are secured and all nonessential staff and volunteers leave the site. More preparation time leads to a more secure site (Figure 4 22). Once the storm has passed the staff is allowed back on site and a command center for disaster response is created T he staff perform s stabilizing measures on the site and rope off affected areas for visitor safety. Any destruction to the buildings, site or collections is documented and preliminary steps

PAGE 66

66 are taken in addressing the damage. Affe cted artifacts and objects are removed for salvaging and stabilization. Experts and resources for preservation are called upon as needed. Relocated items are returned to their original positions. The museum then opens to the public to resume normal oper ations. Year round, if a severe storm warning is issued; the museum site is closed to the public. All visitors and volunteers are requested to leave with the staff to follow after securing the site (Kocian, H., personal communication, February 6, 2009). Plan Basis and Revisions The Emergency Preparedness Plan for Historic Spanish Point was created in 1993. The senior staff at Historic Spanish Point, in conjunction with the Board of Trustees of the Gulf Coast Heritage Association, Inc., used well known bibliographical resources from agencies, literature, and conference proceedings in making the emergency plan. Agency sources included the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (1990), the National Park Service: U.S. Department of the Interior (1990), the National Fire Protection Association, the National Trust for Historic Preservation (1991), and the J. Paul Getty Museum Foundation (1998). Other resources include authors Carl Nelson (1991), John Hunter (1990), Arthur Flitner (1988), Hilda Bohem (1978), David Godschalk (1989), David Bower (1989) and Timothy Beatley (1989), along with the Southeastern Museum Conference (1991). The plan has been revised three times since creation: May 2000, June 2005, and March 2003. During review, all museum staff mem bers are allowed contribution of ideas and input to the plan. The document is then examined and approved by the Executive Director and the Gulf Coast Heritage Association, Inc. Board of Directors (Kocian, H., Personal communication, 2009).

PAGE 67

67 Current Disaster Plan Structure The hurricane preparedness plan for Historic Spanish Point is part of an overall disaster plan that encompasses all possible disasters for the entire complex. It conforms to the standard format issued by the local county government with added details to address specific site issues. Sections in the plan include: general identification of guidelines and types of emergencies, specific plans and procedures base on type of emergency and the emergency recovery plan. There are not individual pl ans for each building in the museum complex. The plan discusses no specific item locations or security matters so management willingly distributes copies to all museum staff members. Every staff member is given a copy of the emergency plan when he or she is hired, and new copies are distributed after each revision (Kocian, H., personal communication, February 6, 2009). The plan begins with a mission statement and introduction explaining the objectives of the emergency plan It then has a general process for prevention, preparation and protection. Potential hazards and security measures are identified along with the types of possible emergency situations that could impact Historic Spanish Point. Museum personnel contact information is provided. The emer gency actions and procedures process is then discussed in detail giving steps for the museum staff to follow in many types of crisis. Following this is a detailed recovery process to return the museum t o normal operations (Figure 423). Content s ummary Th e plan covered Medical Emergencies and Accidents, Human Activities, Natural Disasters and Industrial Disasters. Outlined in the document are medical emergencies, accidents and human activities. Tornados, hurricanes, flooding, wildfires, severe thundersto rms and lightning round out the natural disasters dealt with in the plan. Electrical power failure, chemical

PAGE 68

68 spills, and fire make up the industrial disasters included. The plan is dispersed to all Historic Spanish Point staff members. This makes the pl an accessible to all employees and encourages communication about plan revisions and implementation. To organize this interaction the document contains a contact table of all full time personnel. The emergency plan has three phases: mitigation/preparat ion, response, and recovery. The emergencies are discussed in detail regarding the first two phases, mitigation and response. Steps and procedures provided aid the staff in preparing for and dealing with these incidents. The following section contains m easures for after an emergency has occurred. For organization a recovery schedule is provided. Each storm scenario has a unique set of recovery guidelines (Figure 4 24 ). Appendices included are the maritime museum preparedness measures, a glossary of te rms, a bibliography with sources used in plan writing, locations of safety equipment and supplies, a list of local emergency services with contact information, and a list of local, state and national professional resources to be employed by the Historic Spanish Point staff in an emergency. Content Analysis Categories The content analysis of the emergency preparedness plan searched for any repeating themes or actions within the documents. This analysis revealed that the plan information and actions fit into six categories. The primary actions or verb contained in the various plan steps or instructions was used in this categorizing. The six categories were identified as: Supply, Relocate, Secure, Recover, Communicate, and Organize. The possibility of a sev enth category was examined but dismissed due to similarity of meaning in vocabulary between the extraneous actions and actions already assigned to a pre existing category. Recommendations about safety equipment, emergency supplies, first aid and preservat ion equipment fall into the category

PAGE 69

69 Supply Actions involving the movement of people or objects were grouped under the Relocate category. Some actions included were removing electric office equipment offsite, evacuation of site visitors and moving furni ture and objects away from windows and doors. Under the Secure category went all actions to secure or protect the site, closing shutters and doors, covering items, storing collections items, and closing the site to the public. The Recover category encompassed damage assessments and all post disaster actions. Assigned to this category were actions such as historic building and item reconstruction conservation and repairs. Cleaning up the site and reopening to the public were also sorted into this categor y. Measures in the Communicate category incorporated all actions that promoted communication, direction, notification and cooperation. Notifying staff of directions, informing visitors of the situation at hand, contacting insurance adjusters, cooperatio n with emergency personnel and teamwork actions were included into Communicate. The category Organize contained actions and items that aided in organization: records, maps, forms, lists, and reports. Actions mentioned included assigning tasks, having proper documentation, possessing a written plan of action, updating and revising procedures, organizing resources, itemizing responsibilities, and having contact information on hand. The actions in the Historic Spanish Point plan were concentrated in Organiz e with Communicate a close second. Recover came in closely behind, with Secure and Relocate being almost equal. Supply was the least filled category. T able 42 shows which actions were assigned to particular categories. Most of the actions occupied the Organize category, which included 23.68% of the total plan actions. The Communicate category had the second most actions at 21.43%. Recover came next with 21.05% of actions. The actions assigned to the Secure category comprised 19.92% of total plan actions. Relocate, 8.27%, and Supply, 5.64%,

PAGE 70

70 had the least amount of actions. Figure 425, a pie chart, shows the content analysis percentage distribution of actions to essential guideline categories. Model The percentages from each category were translated into a relationship model to coordinate the plan structure with the relative contribution of each essential guideline category in the disaster preparedness plan. The relationship model is illustrated in Figure 4 26. Organize, and Communicate, the two cat egories with the most percentage of actions are interdependent. Together they make up 45.11% of the actions in the plan. These affect the Secure, Relocate and Recover categories. Secure and Relocate, together 28.19% of total action in plan, are interrela ted and both influence Recover. Recover itself concerns 21.05% of the plan actions. Supply, 5.64%, is distributed among all of the other categories because each category requires certain supplies. The Historic Spanish Point staff expects recovery to be necessary since, having a modest budget and small amount of staff members, there are few monetary and personnel resources to funnel into securing the site beforehand.

PAGE 71

71 Figure 41. Circus Museums Tibbals Learning Center. Photograph by author. 3 Nov. 2008. Figure 42. The Museum of Art and courtyard. Photograph by author. 3 Nov. 2008.

PAGE 72

72 Figure 43. Banyan Caf. Photograph by author. 3 Nov. 2008. Figure 44. Ringling Estate aerial image showing location of the historic mansion in respect t o Sarasota Bay waterfront. Modified from image retrieved on February 5, 2009 from http://maps.google.com/.

PAGE 73

73 Figure 45. Panels over courtyard skylight to protect it from sun and projectile damage. Photograph by author. 3 Nov. 2008. Figure 46. Interior view of courtyard skylight with original stained glass. Photograph by author. 3 Nov. 2008.

PAGE 74

74 Figure 47. C dZan Mansion plan implementation

PAGE 75

75 Figure 48. Structure of current Ringling Museum hurricane plan.

PAGE 76

76 Figure 49. C dZan Mansion plan content.

PAGE 77

77 Figure 410. The smaller items of furniture, such as these arm chairs, lamps and tables would be relocated. Photograph by author. 3 Nov. 2008. Figure 411. Larger items, such as this credenza would remain in place, covered in plastic or moved away from windows. Photograph by author. 3 Nov. 2008.

PAGE 78

78 Table 4 1. Plan content analysis categories and itemized action distribution list. Category Actions assigned to category during content analysis Supply Emergency equipment Temperature and humidity monitor Fans, dehumidifiers, and wet vacuum Recover Assess damage Restore operations Return objects and furniture to proper locations Communicate Contact employees Provide necessary directions Inform public Inform staff Notify proper authori ties Coordinating activities Reviewing procedures Relocate Evacuate public Relocate artifacts, art and furniture Evacuate personnel Move items away from windows and doors. Organize Location floor plans Sandbag maps Checklists Have proper documentation Re location/move sheets Contact tree and employee sheets Secure Fortify openings Sandbag doorways Anchor large furniture and objects Cover items with plastic Close blinds Store items away from windows

PAGE 79

79 Figure 412. P lan content analysis p ie chart showin g percentages of total actions that fall into each guideline category. Figure 413. Ringling plan content analysis categories relationship model.

PAGE 80

80 Figure 414. Guptill house, a twostory residence built by the pioneers. Photograph by author. 6 Feb 2009. Figure 415. Acorn Cottage, built in 1935, closed to the public. Photograph by author. 6 Feb. 2009.

PAGE 81

81 Figure 416. White Cottage. Photograph by author. 6 Feb. 2009. Figure 417.White Cottage in relation to the southern waterfront of H istoric Spanish Points Peninsula. Photograph by author. 6 Feb. 2009.

PAGE 82

82 Figure 418. Aerial image showing Historic Spanish Point location in respect to Little Sarasota Bay waterfront. Modified from image retrieved on February 5, 2009 from http://maps. google.com/. Figure 419. Piano, original to the Guptill House. Photograph by author. 6 Feb. 2009.

PAGE 83

83 Figure 420. Period furniture in the Guptill House. Photograph by author. 6 Feb. 2009. Figure 421. Period furniture in the Guptill House. Pho tograph by author 6 Feb. 2009.

PAGE 84

84 Figure 422. Historic Spanish Point p lan implementation.

PAGE 85

85 Figure 423. Structure of current Historic Spanish Point hurricane plan

PAGE 86

86 Figure 424. Historic Spanish Point plan content.

PAGE 87

87 Table 4 2. Plan content analysis categories and itemized action distribution list Category Actions assigned to category during content analysis Supply Safety equipment First aid kits Emergency supplies Relocate Remove electric office equipment offsite Evacuation of site visitors Mo ving furniture and objects away from windows and doors Secure Secure parameter of site Cover items with plastic Secure shutters and doors Close site to public Store collection items Recover Reconstruction Conservation Re open to public Repairs Cleanup C ommunicate Notify staff of directions Inform visitors of situation Contact insurance adjuster Cooperate with emergency services Teamwork Organize Assign tasks Have proper documentation Have written plan of action Update and revise procedures Organize res ources Itemize responsibilities Have contact information on hand

PAGE 88

88 Figure 425. Plan content analysis pie chart showing percentages of total actions that fall into each guideline category. Figure 426. Historic Spanish Point p lan content analysis c ategories relationship model

PAGE 89

89 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION CrossCase Conclusions The presented case studies, which covered two Sarasota County historic sites, provided the basis for a comparative analysis to identify commonalities and differences between hurric ane preparedness plans for small and large historic house museums. The individual case studies looked at how funding and size characteristics affected a historic house museum s hurricane preparedness plan. The overarching goal of this cross case analysis was to discover a set of essential guidelines in the disaster preparedness plans These guidelines could then be used by staff members of any historic house museum, irrespective of its size, to direct the writing of an initial disaster plan or as a measu re to evaluate a current disaster plan. During the course of research strict protocols were utilized in regard to the data collection st eps and the information examination documentation. Both museums had written disaster plans, which made content exami nation possible and were willing to participate in the study, which made them available research candidates. The variants in museum profile characteristics provided necessary contrast for preliminary case study results. However, there were limitations t o this research and its findings. One issue that arose concerned access to the written plans. Historic Spanish Point provide d a copy of its plan for analysis but, due to security concerns, the Ringling Museum of Art: C dZan plan was confidential and re quired on site examination Second, the study was limited by time constraints The data collection was conducted outside of hurricane season so as to not interfere with disaster preparation at the museums and facilitate a higher response rate. Finally, this precursory study yielded findings that are specific to these two distinctive structures and the particular climate in which they are situated. Therefore, and consistent with the exploratory intent of this study, these results cannot yet be generalize d to the

PAGE 90

90 entire historic house museum population. Further studies including multiple cases should be performed to confirm these results to this group. These outcomes will need examination in other geographical contexts, museum settings, budget brackets staff sizes, and museums types. What this study found is the possibility of a new perspective regarding disaster plans. The essential guideline categories discovered in the case study content analysis are not linear progressions like the phases that c ur rently divide the plans. These categories are processes in a dependent relationship that, when coupled with the current phases, will yield steps covering all necessary procedures during a disaster situation. The determination of dependency arose from mul tiple actions, contained in a single plan step, falling into separate guideline categories due to vocabulary variations. These actions were then considered dependent due to their effect on other actions in the same step. Afterwards, this dependency was t ranslated into the graphic models illustrating the disaster preparedness plan in each case study. This research suggests a disaster preparedness plan, formatted with the linear phases and dependant categories, containing essential guidelines synthesized f rom both plans examined. This forms a standard plan outline that historic house museums can customize and use to create their own preparedness plan or evaluate an existing plan. Size Variable Effects The size variables examined during the two case studies consisted of property size, number of buildings, size of buildings, collection value, budget size, property improvement and number of staff members. These variables were analyzed to discover how they impacted the disaster plan document, steps, and imple mentation. Property s ize The Ringling Museum has a sixty six acre complex while Historic Spanish Point possesses thirty acres. Both properties incorporate nine structures. T hough the buildings in the Ringling

PAGE 91

91 Museum are larger, and five are historic, the re is only one historic house on property. Historic Spanish Point, also with five of its buildings being historic structures, has four such houses. One of these, Guptill House, is set up as a historic house museum, a second, White Cottage, is used for ex hibits and offices, the third, Point Cottage, accommodat es education programs and the fourth, Acorn Cottage, is used for storing items. The C dZan Mansion has original furnishings artwork, and objects representing great monetary and historical value In the houses at Historic Spanish Point, a less expensive collection of period objects donated to the museum fill in the historical and educational gaps. The only original furnishings are a piano in the Guptill House and an organ in Marys Chapel, itsel f a reconstructed building. The C d Zan Mansion has four floors with fiftysix rooms and 36,000 square feet. This mansion is much larger than any of the historic houses at Historic Spanish Point T he largest of the structures there Guptill House and White Cottage, only have two levels each. Historic Spanish Point also has cultural landscaping and archeological sites on property These additional attractions split the attention of site personnel between all of the structures and the museum grounds As a result, the Historic Spanish Point staff cannot concentrate their efforts on one building as the C dZan Mansion staff does when securing the site before a storm. This division of attention necessitates a plan that encompasses the entire Historic Sp anish Point property. Because of its size, the C dZan Mansion has space to relocate the vast amount of objects in the building during a hurricane situation. This demands move sheets as a way to keep track of the many objects being relocated. The mansi on also has several different rooms, requiring special directions for each space. This causes plan division according to steps by room Because the Historic Spanish Point structures are not large enough to provide a safe storage area the plan includes a larger concentration of directions to shift furniture and items away from w indows and

PAGE 92

92 doors. There are no directives to move historical items to other building s Instead of being divided by room, the steps in this plan are divided by emergency type to c over the small structures in any situation, and there are no specific directions for each historic house on property. Budget and s taff The museum budgets have vast disparities. Ringlings budget size stated in the case study far exceeds the Historic Spanish Point reported budget range of $500,000 to $999,999. The large Ringling budget provides for property improvements, maintenance and building upkeep. It also affords the museum a higher number of staff members. Ringling has over two hundred staff memb ers for the complex and six to ten for just the C dZan Mansion. This money and manpower provide ample resources to secure and prepare the museum for impending storms, including sandbagging the mansion doors to prevent water intrusion. With these financ ial resources alongside being maintained and prepared, the museum has little to worry about after a storm This provides assurance that the mansion will be well preserved through the experience. By contrast, Historic Spanish Point has only six to fifteen staff memb ers for the entire museum. The discrepancy in funding and labor cause a shift in plan actions. Instead of relying heavily on maintenance and preparation, the staff members at Historic Spanish Point prepare to their best ability and expect post storm recuperation measures to be necessary A recovery schedule is supplied in the plan document to direct actions after a disaster Th is staff size difference caused variations in the disaster situation chain of comman d by influencing responsibility delegation. Where the Ringling museum is concerned, plan responsibilities are delegated through an explicit chain of command. Starting with the complexs Emergency Coordinator, followed by a Senior Management Leader and a Team Leader, information and dut ies are disseminated through each buildings Team Coordinator to their team

PAGE 93

93 members. At Historic Spanish Point the Executive Director heads the emergency response operations but each staff member is responsible for securing and preparing their own assigne d area. Also, Historic Spanish Point includes volunteers in their disaster team when available. The Ringling Museum uses staff members only, preferring to operate with persons already employed. This difference in staff also affects disaster plan access. The Ringling Museum plan contained security measures causing it to be confidential and therefore not distributed to general staff outside of the mansion. Only those staff members required for implementation were granted access to the plan document. Histo ric Span ish Points plan is supplied to all employees when hired because the information is not as sensitive and all employees are utilized in disaster preparation. Staff sizes, along with property sizes, also impacts the plan s content Since the Ringli ng Museum of Art has many staff members to coordinate over large structures and area, each building on property has an individual disaster preparedness process. This incorporates a plan specifically for mansion disaster preparation. Whereas Historic Span ish Point having fewer staff members and smaller buildings, possesses an all encompassing plan document for the entire property. Property i mprovements The museum budget also affects how much and what type of property improvements can be performed to the h istoric house museum. The extent of these property improvements then affects the amount of preparedness necessary. At the Ringling Museum of Art, fifteen million dollars went toward restoration to the C dZan Mansion. Historic Spanish Point spent four million dollars on house restoration and educational programs combined. The C dZan Mansion staff has conducted protectionfocused improvements such as the 3 M film on the windows, acrylic panels over the courtyard skylight, and a new tile roofing system Large trees near the mansion have been removed to prevent them from causing damage during storm force

PAGE 94

94 winds. Further restorations have made a securer building envelope that demands less exterior storm preparation The C dZan staff is assured that ver y little interior damage will occur because the structure is secure. This, coupled with their extensive pre storm preparation measures, means that their recovery requirements should be minimal. Historic Spanish Point, though its buildings have been restored as well, have done less extensive restoration and protection to the buildings. For added projectile protection, The Guptill House and the Visitors Center: Osprey School at Historic Spanish Point have acrylic windows installed outside the original wind ows. Due to the smaller amount of these types of protection oriented restoration measures, the museums staff expects the site to require more exhaustive measures post storm to restore normal operations to the museum Extraneous variables: setting, accred itation, and governance Some extraneous variables noted during the case studies were setting, accreditation, and governance characteristics. The participating museums are located in Sarasota County, on the Gulf Coast side of the Florida peninsula. Their geographical proximity and waterfront locations expose the structures to comparable environmental and climatic conditions such as salt water and wind. This exposure subjects the structures to deterioration and erosion on a regular basis, not only during s torms, which demands regular building maintenance. The nearness to their respective bodies of water also puts them at a heightened risk for storm surge and hurricane damage. Historic Spanish Point is set in a more wooded area, but both museums have large trees that could damage the structures. These factors account for damage in a hurricane event and are what the disaster plans are intended to protect against. This explains why both museum disaster preparedness plans contain similar actions and guidelin e categories. Both participants are historic site museum complexes incorporating one or more historic houses though they possess contrasting governance types A state institution administers the

PAGE 95

95 John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art, whereas a private, not for profit organization manages Histori c Spanish Point They have each been accredited by the American Association of Museums (AAM) and are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. These agencies offer the museums similar incentive and grant opportunities, along with being sources of preservation and conservation information. The AAM guides the museums with standards and best practices for operation. To do this, the association provides a code of ethics directing governance, collections a ppropriation, and programs. Remaining in good standing implies compliance with their ethical and practice requirements. Part of this compliance includes having a written emergency preparedness plan, training staff, and practicing preparation procedures. Thus, as required to be accredited by this association, each museum has developed and implemented a disaster plan. Their staff members are trained in these plans, and, over time, these documents have become more specified in accordance with the particular characteristics of the two museums. Plan Analysis and Explanation The content analysis performed during these case studies further defined the differences between the museums approaches to disaster management. This analysis, paired with inquiry about pl an implementation, provided insight into the similarities and differences between plan steps of each museum disaster preparedness plan. Disaster p lans In comparing the plan documents, evidence of the differences between them were subtler than that found re garding the museums size and budget variables. In both cases the museums each have a written disaster plan in place to cope with critical emergency situations as prescribed by the AAM For the Historic Spanish Point disaster plan several written resou rces were consulted. Also, the museum encourages input from the entire staff in revising the plan. In

PAGE 96

96 this manner, museum staff size has an impact on the disaster plan writing and revisions. Having fewer staff members allows Historic Spanish Point to co nsider the input and suggested plan improvements offered by each employee. Since each employee is responsible for his or her own work area, they present added understanding into protection methods for their specific space. The C dZan curator wrote the p lan for the mansion at the Ringling Museum. The Ringling Museum of Art has twenty times as many s taff members as Historic Spanish Point This is too great a number of employees to allow all contribution to the hurricane preparedness plan. Also, most of the Ringling employees are not concentrated in the historic mansion. T here are certain staff members who are trained in the particulars of the mansion and its contents These trained staff members are allowed participation in the plan implementation T o o many involved staff members would cause confusion in the precise documentation and moving operation required by the museums disaster preparedness plan. Staff size and resources also influenced the time frame for review and revisions. With a small budge t and fewer staff members, the small historic house museum complex still reviewed their plan annually. Revisions though, are only prepared as needed after a hurricane season when a problem with the existing plan emerge s Subsequently, the Historic Span ish Point plan has only gone through three revisions. These revisions show that the staff is still improving on their original emergency preparedness plan. The Ringling Museum also reviews its plan annually and makes revisions as needed. In this case, r evisions have only been made in regards to updating furniture or object information, such as location, for the Ringling mansion. This means that, thus far, the disaster preparedness processes within the document, along with the restorative procedures on the mansion, have successfully safeguarded the premises.

PAGE 97

97 One difference found between the written documents concern ed disaster identification. The research aimed to specifically look at hurricane preparedness plans, like that of the Ringling Museum. The discover y was that in the case of Historic Spanish Point, the hurricane preparedness plan was one section with in an emergency preparedness plan encompassing all possible disasters. This provides the museum staff with an all inclusive disaster plan. The im plication of this is that some plan actions are generalized to all natural disaster situations such as hurricanes, severe thunderstorms, severe lightning, tornados, windstorms, flooding, and wildfires. These shared actions are predisaster responsibilities, closed to the public procedures, evacuation plans, insurance information, public relations and health and safety tips. There are, however, specific recovery procedures for each natural disaster. Because of its small size, the museum attempts to effi ciently use its resources through having these all purpose actions. Also, each member of the disaster team is assigned certain responsibilities during every disaster situation, as outlined by the plan. This reduces confusion in a disaster situation by al ready having the necessary actions of each staff member written down. This inclusion of a broad spectrum of disasters also required an extensive list of emergency contacts lest the museum needed additional help during a disaster. Thus, appendices of the plan document include local, state, and national resources along with local emergency services and contact information. Descriptive v ocabulary used in regards to the phases that delineated each plan was found to be comparable. The Ringling plan has four phases: Preparation, Yellow Alert, Red Alert, and Recovery. This is a linear time oriented structure that traces steps from beginning, preventative measures, to end, recovery measures of a storm situation. The preparation phase happens before a hurricane arrives and covers staff, docent, and visitor notification measures. In the preparation

PAGE 98

98 phase staff members review the plan procedures, administrative offices are secured, emergency supply contents are verified, and a hurricane closure sign is placed at the entrance. The Yellow and Red alert phases are enacted during a hurricane. During the Yellow alert phase object relocation and securing occurs with staff proceeding room byroom. Building openings, along with blinds and curtains are closed and low e levation doors are sandbagged. When the Red phase is enacted, the grounds are visually inspected and all nonessential personnel must leave the museum site. The recovery phase takes effect after the storm ha s passed. Steps performed during the Recover phase are meant to move the museum toward normal oper ations. These actions include verifying site safety, contacting team leaders, logging contents and locations of objects, assessing damage and monitoring conditions. Though the Historic Spanish Point is initially divided along emergency type, it identifies three time oriented phases. T hey are similarly designated: Mitigation, Response and Recovery. The Mitigation phase is the preparation phase before an emergency situation to remove hazards on the muse um property and reduce their possible effects. The Response phase applies during a disaster situation to immediately limit its effect on the museum buildings, collections, or people Finally, the Recovery phase takes place after a disaster to help return the museum to normal operations. This includes damage repair and post disaster restoration. During each phase, the museum staff is notified which phase currently applies to the museum s situation Both museum plans have contact information for employee s within the document to aid in disseminating this information. Table 5 1 itemizes the comparison between the museum disaster plans. After the differences and similarities in museum statistics were compared, the content analysis results were examined to measure the two museums along category content distribution and relationship.

PAGE 99

99 Six essential guideline c ategories During the content analysis, six essential guideline categories were uncovered in the plan document actions. These six categories were Supply, Recover, Relocate, Secure, Communicate, and Organize. Both museums contained the same six essential guideline categories. The difference arose in the number of actions within each category for the two museums. When it came to actions in the Organize ca tegory, the Historic Spanish Point plan had 3.28% more actions. It also had 4.3 % more Communicate and 9.21% more Recovery. On the other hand, it had 9.71% fewer Relocate actions, 3.34% fewer Secure actions, and 4.29% fewer Supply actions These numbers illustrate differen ces in the action distribution between the museums disaster preparedness plans. For the Ringling disaster p lan, more relocating and securing actions were used but organization and communication played a large part in constructing a coh esive plan. A museum with more resources, staff and funding has the means to perform more active tasks involving protection and relocation. Demeroukas et al. (2001) discusses adopting these same steps involving boxing and relocating objects to a secure area, to minimize damage before hurricanes. If moving objects is not possible, or if a secure area is not available, the recommendation is to wrap or pad the objects for protection, remove heavy objects from shelves and pedestals, and us e humidity bufferi ng materials to keep moisture away from the collections. The mansion hurricane preparedness plan follows this direction in safeguarding their collection. Actions performed to arrange and order the proper information needed during a disaster situation fil l the Organize category. Because much work goes into preparation before the storm Secure and Relocate then recovery is less of an issue. If items and people are relocated to a safe place and the structure secured, then damage is not as likely. This c auses the Recover category to have fewer actions than the oth er motion oriented categories.

PAGE 100

100 Organiz e is an important category for the Historic Spanish Point plan receiving the most actions during the content ana lysis The Communicate category received th e second highest number of a ctions Thus, a smaller museum, with fewer resources and staff members, utilizes more communication and organization to better coordinate its limited efforts. It follows that Recover receives attention because not enough reso urces can be designated for relocating items and people before a disaster. This translates to a lack of Relocate actions within the emergency preparedness plan. Securing buildings by closing windows and doors or objects by tying down and covering with pl astic takes less manpower to accomplish, therefore there is a larger Secure category. For this reason, the staff at Historic Spanish Point expects many actions to be needed for post disaster recover y. Little attention is given to the S upply category in e ither plan due to the task of procuring provisions being straightforward and, in each museum examined, already accomplished. While the distribution numbers are dissimilar the category relationships are comparable. In both museum disaster preparedness pla ns, actions from the Organize and Communicate categories coordinate the actions of the other categories. Closely tied together, these influence every other category in the plan. This means that these two categories are present throughout the plan phases. The categories requiring labor or manpower are Secure, Relocate and Recover. This requirement of human labor causes these to be motion or movement categories. Actions within these categories entail the staff members physically completing a task. The Secure and Relocate guideline categories are closely related. A ctions of both types were often contained within a single step in the examined plans. The two categories, in cooperation, are required during and after a storm situation. Recover is necessary after a storm to return a museum to normal operations. This category also calls for human labor to carry out its actions. Supply is a

PAGE 101

101 category used throughout the process because every other category necessitates certain supplies to effectively carry ou t the contained actions (Figure 5 1). For a large museum complex incorporating a huge mansion, such as The Ringling Museum, an all encompassing plan would inundate the staff with irrelevant information in a disaster situation Including all possible scena rios would make the plan cumbersome and waste valuable time as the staff sift ed through all of the contained information. Alternatively, a plan of this specificity could benefit smaller house museum s by outlining detailed steps undertake during a disaster Unfortunately, r elocating this quantity of objects These essential guideline category differences suggest that budget and size does affect disaster preparedness plans The budget dictates the number of staff members the museum can support. The funding for restoration and continual m aintenance of the historic structure also comes f rom within the budget. The museums physical size affects staff distribution. With larger buildings or a greater number of buildings, staff must be dispersed accordingly to handle their function This pus hes the limits of a museums human resources. The staff size and distribution impacts the amount and type of organization necessary These two variables also influence the management of communication between staff, the public, local authorities and media on museum property. These directives are within the written disaster preparedness plan as actions, which fell into the Organize and Communicate essential guideline categories. The number and type of historic building maintenance or restoration procedure s completed affects the amount of object securing and relocating actions performed by the staff This effect is due to the assumed or expected strength of the buildings in withstanding storm projectiles, high winds or would be difficult without the proper staff and resources. In the two case studies it was found that the exact percentages of plan actions sorted in to each essential guideline category depended on museum funding and staff.

PAGE 102

102 water surge. These actions revealed in the written document, were placed under the Secure and Relocate categories during content analysis The actions within these categories are also influenced by the actions within the Organize and Communicate categories. Actions from these four categor ies then impact the Recover category actions needed after a disaster (Figure 5 2) The small museum depends more on communication and organization whereas the large museum relies heavily on physical actions requiring movement and manpower. The C dZan disaster team avoids possible damage and ensures a reduced amount of recovery b ecause they possess the resources necessary for a large scal e secure and relocate operation In opposition to this, the staff at Historic Spanish Point expects recovery to be ne cessary. The museum has a significantly smaller budget and fewer staff members. These variables suggest that there are fewer resources to funnel into site protection before a disaster situation at this museum Thus, the effect of funding and size on the museums also resides in the mindset of the staff members who write, revise and implement the plans the Ringling Museums assurance of potentially little recovery versus Historic Spanish Points expectation of much recovery. This outlook then affects every step, section, and phase within the plan. Phases and sections that are thought to be of lesser consequence are explained in less detail Sections of assumed higher importance are more extensive. Recommendations: Historic House Museum Disaster Prepar edness Plan Both disaster plans are tailored to their respective museums as benefits their specificity with a djustments made to each due to monetary or personnel constraints. The six essential guideline categories arose through content analysis of plan documents in these case studies. The identified categories are useful in building a generic template to initiate a disaster preparedness plan or evaluat e a current plan for a historic house museum Thus a basic plan template and sequencing model are propos ed, synthesizing actions and insights from both examined plans.

PAGE 103

103 The template is action specific, but customizable so that museums can change it to fit their specific needs. Museum size, as seen through the case studies, will determine the exact action di stribution and amounts needed within each museums disaster preparedness plan. Proposed Essential Guidelines Category Sequencing Model The suggested model is a composite representation blending common actions garnered from both museums plans. It illustrates the arrangement of each essential guideline category applied in creating a historic house museum disaster preparedness plan In combining traits from the two plans examined, the relationships of the identified essential guideline categories were tak en into consideration. The Organize and Communicate categories shared a close interaction as seen in the direct relationship between them in both the C dZan Mansion and the Historic Spanish Point plan models The se categories are extensive because of their impact on every other category. They are vital in coordinating preparedness efforts ensuring that all necessary documents and people are present during each plan stage. The next three categories Secure, Relocate, and Recover are motion categories indicating they would likely require the most labor and movement. Within these categories are actions to guarantee the physical safety of people and objects. This safety would be assured due to careful planning and communication measures For the proposed model, the contribution of action s to these categories had to be reconciled between the two examined plans but the relationship between the categories remained constant. The C dZan Mansion plan contained numerous relocation actions due to the avail ability of manpower to accomplish the tasks. Historic Spanish Point, having a less abundant labor force, used substantially fewer relocation efforts On account of its staff size and smaller budget, it relied more on salvaging and post disaster actions If maintenance and preparation before a storm were adequate then minimal recovery afterwards would be need ed Nevertheless, recovery and cleanup steps should be extensively outlined in

PAGE 104

104 every disaster preparedness plan When the occasion arises, predet ermined steps for recovery save a museum vital time in beginning salvage operations. The last category, Supply, is distributed among the other categories as in the two examined plans. Supply is related to every other category but not all supplies are a pplicable to each. As per the examined disaster plans, a list of necessary equipment and supplies for each action, possession and easy access to the supplies and equipment, and a routine for updating them appears to be sufficient in maintaining the Supply category. The expectation of much recovery and assurance of little recovery attitudes have been brought together in this sequencing model. Since large, well funded historic house museums have the resources to generate their own sitespecific disaster p lans, this model is geared towards small to medium sized historic house museums. The amount of Secure and Relocate actions has been reconciled with the amount of Recover actions to provide more planning and preparedness prior to a disaster strike. This will lessen the amount of recovery necessary while bolstering the amount of preplanning accomplished. The currently utilized historic house museum plan sections provide a linear progression for implementing a plan, using before, during and after time frame designations for step implementation. Used in conjunction with these linear phases, t he proposed essential guideline categories ensure that each section contains the required actions for optimal plan success. The categories identified in this study are translated into these sections and actions are grouped in the time order in which they should occur. Each section will have an Organize and Communicate and Supply subsection. The section for actions taken during a disaster will have additional subsection s of Secure and Relocate The section for after the storm will include the previous five with the addition of a Recover subsection (Figure 5 3).

PAGE 105

105 Plan s uggestion The interdependency of these essential guideline categories is such that if any one category w ere removed, the entire process would fail. Each set of guidelines affects the others in the aforementioned sequence to facilitate proper plan implementation. To have suitable organization there has to be communication between the individuals involved in carrying out the plan. For there to be adequate communication, a chain of command, proper documentation and a strategy of plan execution must be organized. Organization and Communication together are applied to Relocate, Secure and Recover actions. Rel ocate and Secure are also tied closely together. For example, items that are moved must then be secured in their new location. To enable these five categories, the proper supplies must be present for each. To be able to recover after a disaster situatio n the relocation and protection actions must have been carried out thoroughly. As seen in the model, for the generic template, these six categories are maintained as subsections within the necessary timeoriented plan sections: before, during, and after a storm scenario. Sequence Through the suggested model, this research proposes a more thorough way to arrange the written hurricane disaster prepa redness plan and actions (Tables 52, 5 3, and 54). The before section, or mitigation section, is comprised of the subsections Organize, Communicate and Supply (Table 52). Contained in each subsection are the steps for readying the disaster team hierarchy and museum affairs before a storm strikes. The next section occurs during the storm, identified as the r esponse phase in the examined plans, and possesses the subsections Organize, Communicate, Relocate, Secure and Supply (Table 5 3). Similar to the first section, these subsections include steps for carrying out this phase of the plan. Some steps or items are repeated, as they pertain to both sections of the disaster plan. After the storm, the last phase goes into effect. The section for this phase contains the subsections Organize, Communicate,

PAGE 106

106 Relocate, Secure, Recover, and Supply (Table 54). The acti ons in this phase are projected to return the museums to normal operations. Again, these subsections each contain certain steps, and some steps are repeated. This repetition is to illustrate that some steps occur throughout the course of plan implementat ion or must be performed multiple times during a storm scenario. This last group of steps readies the museum to resume normal prestorm operations. Plan Actions These categories, as proposed in the sequencing model and plan template, are not to be confuse d with the before, during, and after sections. These are produced as subsections within the time oriented sections. I n each category are actions to be performed when implementing that section of the proposed disaster preparedness template. The actions are derived and synthesized from common actions in the case study plans The following shows how specific steps and actions are divided among the essential guideline categories: Organize The Organize category guidelines should be present throughout the plan document and implementation. These guidelines aid in maintaining an order over proceedings from beginning to end in a disaster situation. Part of good organization is having needed information readily available. Quality organization starts with a w ritten plan and a chainof command as seen with both Historic Spanish Point and the Ringling Museum of Art, to arrange plan efforts so that communication and action do not lead to confus ion and complic ations The following are suggested essential Organiz e guidelines: Have a written plan of action for a hurricane situation. The American Association of Museums requires this to meet current risk management efforts. Have a predetermined plan of regularly making revisions and updating the written plan concern ing who is involved and how often. Like the staff at Historic Spanish Point, a fter each storm situation reevaluate which steps were successful and which steps were not helpful, and then amend the plan as needed.

PAGE 107

107 As both participant museums have shown hav i ng an employee contact tree and information sheets available and accessible aid s in information disseminati on. This should be kept with the disaster preparedness plan to facilitate use. This contact tree should also be included with a chainof command gui de, containing a chart with the names of a designated disaster team. The roles of the disaster team will depend on the workings of the specific historic house museum. This is shown through the differences of the participant museums. Good delineation bet ween jobs includes designating an exterior team or team member who will prepare and recover the exterior of the building(s) as well as a team or team member for the interior of the structures. The disaster team should have a chosen leader who directs acti vity throughout plan implementation. For the Ringling Museum, this was the Emergency Coordinator, for Historic Spanish Point it was the Executive Director. The disaster team should be comprised of knowledgeable staff members. Training in plan execution i s recommended by the AAM while t his type of organization promotes communic ation in a plan. Organize resources and supplies. Both museums suggest keeping a list and regular update schedule to make sure supplies are current. As with both museums, have requi red paperwork and documents pertaining to the historic house and its contents. Update inventories of artifacts and museum items regularly. In accordance with the Historic Spanish Point emergency plan, i nsurance paperwork should be current and complete. Also as in the Historic Spanish Point plan, resources, including strategies for emergency funding need to be developed in case of costly damage. Consult resources or local authorities to help with these funding strategies and other possible means of support, have their contact information in the plan. As in the Ringling disaster plan, h ave step completion checklists. Not only does this keep the steps organized, it also facilitates communication so that staff members know which actions have already been accomplished. Also like Ringling, have a way to keep track of moved items such as relocation sheets that give time, date, original location, new location, individual (s) who moved the item, and when it was put back into its original location. Communicate Another major aspect of a plan is good communication. Without communication staff members will not know what duties to perform. Both examined plans demonstrated actions from

PAGE 108

108 Communicate category existing throughout the plan document and implementation. These, like the Organize guidelines aid in directing the Secure, Relocate, and Recover categories during a disaster situation. The following are suggested essential Communicate guidelines: Both plans urge m aintain ing contact with employees throughout the plan process. Staff members should be aware of the disaster plan contents. Whether details are shared with all staff like Historic Spanish Point, or whether it only encompasses staff needed to perform plan duties as in the Ringling plan, depends on the specifics of the museum. Personal safety information should be made available to all staff members. As in each participant plan, t o coordinate preparation activity the selected plan supervisor gives clear directions to the disaster team and museum staff. This dissemination of information is done prior to the disaster situation through regular meetings, bulletins, and memos. During and after a disaster situation, directions can be given through face to face encounters, information sheets, or phone calls, if the staff has been evacuated. This coordination is essential so that the plan is carried out in a timely manner. Provide training to these staff members on how to carry out the disaster plan as required by the AAM The designated disaster team must know whom they report to in an emergency, for this information they should consult the disaster team designation chart located with the contact information, as can be done with either examined plan. To ensure timely recovery efforts, establish a rapport with the local authorities. County governments, like that of Sarasota County, have emergency management websites and response agencies. Communicate with these agencies on a regular basis through phone calls or meetings. Both the Ringling Museum and Historic Spanish Point include this directive in plan implementation. In an emergency, as recommended by the Historic Spanish Point plan, n otify the local fire department, sheriffs office, or emergency service. Arrange a museum visitor notification system to infor m the public in the event of museum closure or a crisis situation. Both museums had a method of post ing signs at the entrance and designat ing staff members to direct visitors away from the museum. Both museums maintain media relations because r eporting on crisis situations as they happen or when a warning has been issued by local authorities helps inform the public and local officials as the museum initiate s preparation actions.

PAGE 109

109 Secure Actions placed into the Secure category during content analyse s are performed as a response to an impending disaster situation by Historic Spanish Point and the Ringling Museum These types of actions are found in the last two sections of the disaster plan template to be executed during and after a storm situation. Incl uded are any actions garnered from the examined plans that require d protecting human beings or objects from possible harm. Both museums specify that the f irst task is to ensu re the protection of human life. W hen necessary ev acuate all visitors and staff. Following the example of the participant museums, during a hurricane warning with storm landfall expected in the next twenty four hours, close the entire museum to the public, as per county or local authority direction. Secure the parameter and site. T his can either be done by a museum grounds department as in the Ringling Museum, or can be a cooperative effort of employees and volunteers as with Historic Spanish Point Both plans advise s ecurity systems, locks and alarms as concrete ways of securing the openings of a structure. When possible, follow the C dZan disaster team lead and provide a safe storage area for collections, away from windows and doors. Anchor large furniture and objects when the relocation is not feasible, as in the case of Historic Spanish Point. Both museums suggest c over ing objects and furniture with plastic or other nonporous mat erial to prevent water damage. Historic Spanish Points plan directs the boxing of smaller items and use of materia l padding to prevent breakage. As reco mmended by the participating museums, w henever possible fortify openings: close building shutters, windows, and doors. Relocate Relocate category actions from the Ringling Museum and Historic Spanish Point disaster plans are also assigned to the last two t ime oriented sections of the disaster plan template From

PAGE 110

110 the content analysis, this category incorporates any actions that require moving human beings or objects. Relocating people and objects in the face of a hurricane situation is imperative. To kee p everyone as safe as possible the museum plans from both participants recommend that guests and visitors be cleared from the site. Pre designated staff members should direct exiting procedures or escort visitors off site. Signs can also be used to direct exit flow as well as inform visitors of museum site closings Both museums require that nonessential staff also be cleared from the site when a severe situation arises though Historic Spanish Point utilizes most staff members in emergency plan implementation The disaster plans from both museums suggest that historic furniture and collections should be moved away from windows and doors. Like the C dZan mansion staff, when possible, designate a safe storage area for emergency storage and transfer hist oric items to this location. Historic Spanish Point gives direction to each staff member to r emove electrical office equipment from their designated work area to a safe storage space. Recover As seen in the case studies, the Recover category is assigned actions that include making repairs around the museum site, performing rehabilitation to the historic house structure, conserving individual objects, along with monitoring and collecting evidence of damage. These measures propel the museum towards resuming normal operations and a re thus found only in the phase executed after a storm has passed. Historic Spanish Point advises the a ssessment of damage to site and structures while monitoring site conditions Both plans recommend the r epair of any damage to the site. Priority should be given to the historic house structures and collections. First to be repaired are damage to roofs, broken windows or any openings in the envelope of the historic house that would allow the elements in. Afterwards other buildings or structures should be attended to. Preliminary repairs must be performed in a timely fashion to stabilize the structures and prevent further damage. If the museum does not have their own conservation specialists, follow the lead of Historic Spanish P oint and c ontact conservation professionals if needed.

PAGE 111

111 Perform rehabilitation as needed. Specific damage cannot always be anticipated. This rehabilitation may involve some or much reconstruction and conservation on the historic structures, depending on t he situation. These procedures should always follow the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Secretary of Interiors guidelines. Collect evidence of damage. For Historic Spanish Points plan, t his includes documenting and photographing damaged items; damage reports and evidence is necessary to file insurance claims. Both museums propose c lean ing and clear ing debris from the museum site and adjacent structures. This will also aid in promoting human safety. Return furniture and objects to pr oper locations each museum studied did this as soon as possible in order to continue normal operations and re open to the public Supply Each participant museum makes sure to have emergency supplies available. T hough Supply is a small category in each pl an, it is essential. Every other category found required certain types of supplies in order to perform the actions in that grouping. Supplies needed to protect employees and guests throughout a disaster situation are crucial for human safety. As Nelson (1991) made clear in his text, human safety is the highest priority in any crisis situation. Historic Spanish Points emergency disaster plan dictated that fire extinguishers and a first aid kit should be readily available. First aid kits need to include s terile and adhesive bandages, antibiotic ointment, burn ointment, thermometer, eye washing agent, and cleansing substances. Historic Spanish Point also suggested having tools to monitor and control humidity and temperature levels in the historic building. Along with this equipment, f ans, dehumidifiers, thermometers, air conditioning units and wet vacuums should be on hand in case of humidity and moisture damage. For office devices, essential equipment includes surge protectors and emergency generators. I n every building, according to Historic Spanish Point, s moke detectors and fire alarms should be installed, if possible. Provisions necessary for a hurricane situation at Historic Spanish Point include d flashlights and batteries in case of power outages while p rotection supplies for staff included gloves, goggles, and earplugs. Both museums called for a n inventory of emergency supplies should be performed regularly and supplies should be updated as needed.

PAGE 112

112 Further Research Opportunities for further analys is exist in conducting this research for a wider range of case studies. Since this is an exploratory case study to obtain preliminary findings, a more indepth multiple case study report is needed to substantiate these findings. This would further genera lize these study findings to the historic house museum population. D elving into the situations of other geographical regions would provide beneficial information on whether these hypotheses hold true for the entire historic house museum population. Even t o generalize the findings to the historic house museum population in Florida, more contrasting cases would have to be completed. To broaden findings to the Eastern United States would require surveying multiple museums of different sizes from each state and analyzing their disaster preparedness plans. This research is specific to these two historic house museums, but multiple institutions, including other types of museums and historic sites, share the issues this study examines. Conducting studies to i ncorporate these other types of museums or institutions would provide beneficial information on whether similar results hold carry to other populations. Other issues, such as the impact of location, plan availability, and volunteer availability should als o be scrutinized. Locations to be examined include rural museums as well as urban museums along with other climate or terrain variations. If the plans were more available to employees or volunteers, museums might receive more aid by way of laborers. If a museum uses volunteers, recruitment methods may impact disaster preparation along with length of time a volunteer stays with the museum. Another study to perform would include examining the cost spent by a smaller museum on volunteer training in opposit ion to the cost of hiring professionals. What does this training cost entail? If it is comprised of monetary funds, time and additional work by

PAGE 113

113 staff, which of these costs is more? How would this scale be determined? And which cost would spur the museu m to hire professionals? What are other variables involved? The e ssential guideline categories model and template offered in this study, gives smaller museums access to the essential steps needed for a disaster preparedness plan to protect their collectio n and structure. These categories also leave room to allow the plan to be customized by the museum staff. Examining multiple museums in other budget categories with different staff sizes would provide information on the prevalence of the essential guidel ine categories found in these two case studies. This suggests that examining other variables may give different results. If this holds true, these guideline categories could be expanded to incorporate additional measures. Different variables could includ e museum type and other types of disaster plans. If museum type were a variable would the same essential guideline groupings arise? Do these categories apply to all hurricane preparedness plans? Do they apply to all emergency plans or to plans covering other disaster situations such as earthquakes, tornados or floods? Exceptions to the size classifications utilized in this research could be studied. For this study, a small museum or large museum was defined by budget, size, collection value, and staf f size. An exception to this classification could be a museum of small physical size and few staff members but having a large budget. Another exception would be an under funded museum of large physical size with more than thirty staff members. Would a content analysis of their plans reveal the same essential guideline groupings? What would the relative distribution of plan actions be among these categories? Individual item conservation techniques could also be examined in an endeavor to come up with m ore explicit guidelines. Items would be specific to the museum being studied but could possibly be grouped in categories of like items to find

PAGE 114

114 guidelines for every item group. This conservation document could be added to a disaster preparedness plan or be used as reference material in dealing with property destruction. If favorable circumstances were present, the efficacy of each disaster preparedness plans approach could be tested during a disaster situation. This participant observation study would accompany a longitudinal case study. During this case, the necessary information would come from observation of preparedness plan implementation before a hurricane, response during the hurricane, and then observation of recovery measures after the hurricane Problems may arise due to interference with staff during observational analysis. Other issues inhibiting analysis would include museums being unwilling to participate because of the circumstances, the unpredictability of hurricane occurrence, or danger to the researcher because of the situation. Because historic house museums provide a concrete link to human history, it is imperative that further research in their conservation be conducted. Particularly in the ever growing threat of natural disasters, preserving these buildings is becoming more difficult. It is the responsibility of all individuals in the fields of design, construction, building and preservation to contribute to this safeguarding endeavor. Historic preservationists and the museum com munity are at the forefront of research on historic buildings, but interior designers have the most connection with the interiors of these structures (Murtagh, 2006). Though interior designers in their tendency to favor modernism and appease the personal tastes of their clients usually disregard the past, preservationists have a propensity for concentrating on the exterior. This leaves historic interiors as an afterthought (Murtagh, 2006) This study sought to avoid the loss of historic interiors due to hurricane damage by protecting the historic house museums collections through discovering essential guidelines in disaster preparedness plans and providing a general, customizable template. More cooperation between the interior design and historic preservation discipline s is

PAGE 115

115 necessary in the effort to protect and preserve these historic buildings (Murtagh, 2006). Natural disasters will never cease to plague historic landmarks. The task is now at hand for both disciplines to find the best way to handle the se potentially catastrophic situations.

PAGE 116

116 Table 5 1. Comparison between the participating museums disaster plans. Ringling Museum of Art Historic Spanish Point Specific to Hurricane disaster situations. Covers all emergency situations. Contact tree an d contact sheet for each employee Full time personnel contact table Plan specifically for historic mansion preparation One plan that covers entire museum Checklists of steps to be completed in each building. No specific directions for each house Floor plans for object location Has a list of safety equipment locations. Sandbag maps Has a museum recovery schedule. Phases: Preparation, Yellow Alert, Red Alert, Recovery Phases: Mitigation/Preparation, Response, Recovery Divided into actions by room Divide d into actions by type of emergency situation Relocation directions for objects, furniture and artwork. Directions to move furniture and items away from windows, but not to relocate items to another area. Disaster chain of command structuring table. App endix of local, state and national professional resources. Security Measures Appendix of local emergency services and contact information. Plan is confidential Plan is supplied to all employees. It is not classified because there is no classified informa tion. No volunteers, only up to 6 trained staff members exclusively for mansion preparation. Volunteers utilized, along with 610 staff members to prepare the entire complex, 3 of which concentrate on the historic houses Each building section of plan is written by a curator Plan based off of reference texts with contributions by all staff members.

PAGE 117

117 Figure 51: Examined plans comparable relationship model content analysis categories found in the plans interacted similarly.

PAGE 118

118 Figure 52. Effects of budget and size on disaster preparedness.

PAGE 119

119 Figure 53. Proposed sequencing model for essential preparedness guideline categories.

PAGE 120

120 Table 5 2. Before the storm subsections and steps. Section Subsection Steps Before the storm Organize Have writte n plan of action Organize resources Checklists Have proper documentation Contact tree and employee sheets Assign tasks Have proper documentation Itemize responsibilities chain of command Have contact information on hand: employee, local authorities, ins urance Communicate Contact employees Provide necessary directions Inform staff Coordinating activities Reviewing procedures Inform visitors of situation Teamwork Supply Forms and documentation for historic items Contact sheets Checklists Plan

PAGE 121

121 Tabl e 5 3. During the storm subsections and steps. Section Subsection Steps During the storm Organize A way to keep track of relocated items such as relocation/move sheets Checklists Have proper documentation Contact tree and employee sheets Assign tasks H ave proper documentation Itemize responsibilities chain of command Have contact information on hand: employee, local authorities, insurance Communicate Contact employees Provide necessary directions Inform staff Coordinating activities Reviewing procedures Inform visitors of situation Teamwork Relocate Relocate artifacts, art and furniture Evacuate personnel Remove electric office equipment offsite Evacuation of site visitors Moving furniture and objects away from windows and doors Secure Fortify openings: Secure shutters, blinds, windows and doors Close site to public Store collection items Anchor large furniture and objects Cover items with plastic Store items away from windows Supply Surge protectors First aid kit Personal safety equipment Chec klists

PAGE 122

122 Table 5 4. After the storm subsections and steps. Section Subsection Steps After the storm Organize Update and revise procedures A tracking system for relocated items such as relocation/move sheets Checklists Have proper documentation Contact tree and employee sheets Assign tasks Itemize responsibilities chain of command Have contact information on hand: employee, local authorities, insurance Have proper documentation Communicate Contact employees Notify proper authorities Contact insurance adjuster Cooperate with emergency services Provide necessary directions Inform staff Coordinating activities Reviewing procedures Inform visitors of situation Teamwork Relocate Return objects and furniture to proper locations Secure Secure parameter o f site Conservation Recover Assess damage Restore operations Re open to public Reconstruction Repairs Cleanup Supply Temperature and humidity monitors Fans, dehumidifiers, and wet vacuums Emergency generator First aid kit Personal safety equipment

PAGE 123

123 APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE 1. Museum Type Information on Historic House Museum Demographics and Hurricane Preparedness Plan If you have any questions regarding this survey please contact: Jennifer Bassett Dr. Maruja Torres Antonini jenibear@ufl.edu mta@ufl.edu (407) 4438839 (352)3920252 Please return this survey as an email attachment to jenibear@ufl.edu; fax to (407) 521 7210 attn. Jennifer Bassett, or fax to (352) 3927266 attn. Dr. Maruja Torres Antonini Demographic Information a. Historic Site Museum complex containing a Historical House. b. Historic House Museum (House only). c. Other ______________________________ 2. Budget Size a. $350,000 and under b. $350,000$499,999 c. $500,000$999,999 d. $1,000,000$2.9M e. $3M $4.9M f. $5M $14.9M g. $15M and over 3. Governance Type. Please circle which best describes your institution. a. County/Regional b. Federal c. Municipal d. State e. College/University f. Private NonProfit g. Other (e.g., joint governance, trust, school district) 4. Number of Full time staff (for the entire institution) a. 15 b. 615 c. 1630 d. 3150 e. 5170 f. 71100 g. 101150 h. 151200 i. Over 200 5. Number of Full time staff (for the historic house only) a. 15 b. 615 c. 1630 d. 3150

PAGE 124

124 e. 5170 f. 71100 g. 101150 h. 151200 i. Over 200 6. Geographic Region a. Panhandle b. Northeast Florida c. East Central Florida d. West Central Florida e. South Florida *Al l above scales based off of the American Association of Museums Museum Accreditation Program, Annual Statistics AtA Glance, January 2008. Hurricane Plan Information 7. How long does it typically take (in days) to carry out the Hurricane Preparedness plan? a. 13 b. 35 c. 610 d. 1014 e. 15 or more 8. How many people are required to perform the duties outlined in the Hurricane Preparedness plan? a. 13 b. 35 c. 610 d. 1014 e. 15 or more 9. How often is the disaster plan for you institution revised? a. Semi Annually b. Annually c. Other _______________ 10. Is there an overall plan that encompasses the entire museum complex? If so, please briefly summarize the plan format and contents. ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ 11. Is there an individual plan for each structure in the museum complex? If so, please briefly describe the plan format and contents. ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ 12. Who is involved in writing the hurricane plan? (Please list all personnel positions involved). ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________

PAGE 125

125 13. Who is involved in carrying out the steps of the hurricane plan? (Plea se list all personnel positions involved). ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ 14. How long does i t take, in days, for your institution to return to normal operations after the hurricane has passed? (e.g. allow guests to return to property). a. 13 b. 35 c. 610 d. 1014 e. 15 or more 15. Please describe below any additional measures to maintenance or upkeep of your ins titution which aid in structural strength against hurricane damage (you may attach an additional page if you need more space): _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________

PAGE 126

126 APPENDIX B INTERVIEW QUESTIONS Information on Histori c House Museum Demographics and Hurricane Preparedness Plan Interviewer Contact information: Jennifer Bassett Dr. Maruja Torres Antonini jenibear@ufl.edu mta@ufl.edu (407) 4438839 (352)3920252 1. What does the schedule of a typica l day during hurricane plan implementation entail? Interview Questions 2. What is the longest amount of time your museum has spent implementing the hurricane plan? What is the shortest? 3. What factors influence how long plan implementation takes? 4. Which staff members take part in p erforming the duties outlined in the Hurricane Preparedness plan? Docents? Full time staff? Volunteers? Please list job titles, not individual names and include number of people. 5. When was your museums disaster plan last revised? When is the next revision scheduled? 6. Who takes part in making revisions to the plan? Please list job titles, not individual names. 7. How does the plan for the Historic House museum fit into the plan for the rest of the museum complex? 8. Can you elaborate on how each structures plan f its into the plan for the overall complex? 9. What does your institution or museum consider normal operations to entail? 10. How quickly do normal operations resume? 11. How does the museum operate in the meantime? 12. Please describe any additional measures to main tenance or upkeep of your institution that aids in structural strength against hurricane damage. 13. How does each aforementioned measure help sustain the structure against hurricane damage? 14. What is the most common type of damage from hurricanes sustained by the historic structure?

PAGE 127

127 APPENDIX C MUSEUM RESOURCES The following list of resources has been compiled to provide additional planning materials, funding information, and advice on disaster planning for historic house museums. The website for each resourc e is provided: International International Council of Museums (ICOM), http://icom.museum/ ICOMs International Committee for Historic House Museums DEMHIST, http://demhist.icom. museum/ International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and the Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), http://www.iccrom.org/ International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), http://www.icomos.org/ United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), http://www.unesco.org/ World Monuments Fund (WMF), http://www.wmf.org/ Conservation Information Network (CIN), http://www.bcin.ca/ National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), http:// www.achp.gov/ American Association for State and Local History (AASLH), http :// www.aaslh.org/ Army Corp of Engineers, http://www.usace.army.mil/ American Institute for Conservation (AIC), http://aic.stanford.edu/ American Museum Association (AMA), http://www.aam us.org/ Association for Preservation Technology, http://www.apti.org/ Conservation Center for Art and H istoric Artifacts (CCAHA), http://www.ccaha.org Cons ervation Online (CoOL), http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/ Department of the Interior National Register of Historic Plac es, http://www.nps.gov/nr/ Department of Homeland Security ReadyBusiness.gov, http://www.ready.gov/business/ Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA), http://www.fema.gov/ Heritage Emergency National Task Force, http://www.heritagepreservation.org/programs/taskfer.htm Institute for Museum and Library Se rvices (IMLS), http://www.imls.gov/ The J. Paul Getty Foundation, http://www.getty.edu/ National Center for Technology and Training, http:// www.ncptt.nps.gov/ National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, http://www.ncshpo.org/ National Endowment for the Humanities, http://www.neh.gov/ National Park Serv ice (NPS), http://www.nps.gov/ National Trust for Historic Preservation, http://www.preservationnation.org/ Smithsonian Institute, http: //www.si.edu State Florida 1000 Friends of Florida, http://www.1000friendsofflorida.org/ Florida Department of State Florida Division of Historic Resources, http://www.flheritage.com/ Florida Division of Recreation and Parks, http://www.dep.state.fl.us/parks/ Florida Trust for Historic Preservation, http://www.florida trust.org/ Small Business Administra tion Disaster Area 2, http://www.sba.gov/localresources/disasteroffices/foceast/index.html

PAGE 128

128 Local Sarasota Sarasota County All Hazard s Emergency Management, http://www.scgov.net/EmergencyServices/allhazards.asp Sarasota Alliance for Historic Preservation, http://www.hist oricsarasota.org/ Sarasota County Arts Council, http://www.sarasota arts.org/

PAGE 129

129 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1000 Friends of Florida. (2008). Disaster Mitigation for Historic Structures Protection Strategies. [Brochure]. Retr ieved on December 6, 2008 from http://www.1000fof.org/PUBS/disaster/mitigation.pdf 1000 Friends of Florida. (2006). Disaster Planning for Floridas Historic Resources Including Case Studies. [Brochure]. Retrieved on November 11, 2008 from http://www.1000friendsofflorida.org/PUBS/disaster/manual2.pdf Alred, G. J., Brusaw, C.T., Oliu, W. E. (2008). Handbook of T echnical W riting. (9thAmerican Association of Museums (AAM). (2008). Accreditation Program: Annual Stat istics At A Glance January 2008. [Website]. Retrieved on November 20, 2008 from ed.). New York: St. Martins Press. http://www.aam us.org/accred American Association of Museums (AAM). (2008). About Museums. [Website]. Retrieved on January 16, 2009 from http://www.aam us.org/aboutmuseums/whatis.cfm American Association of Museums (AAM). (2007). AAM Standards Regarding Facilities and Risk Management. [Website]. Retrieved March 13, 2009 from http://www.aam us.org/aboutmuseums/standards/upload/frmstandards.pdf American Association of State and Local History (AASLH) (2005). Small Museums Committee and Affinity Group. [Website]. Retrieved on February 13, 2009 from http://www.aaslh.org/SmallMuseums.htm Barksdale, D. (1998). Disaster recovery response to Tropical Storm Alberto. In D.H.R. Spe nnemann & D.W. Look ( Eds .) Disaster Management Programs for Historic Sites, 133 138. San Francisco, CA: U.S. National Park Se rvice. Betchtel, S. (2006). Roar of the Heavens. New York: Kinsington Publishing Corp. Brice, A., Callebs, S., Dornin, R. Krajnak, D., Marciano, R., Meserve, J. Miller, E., Tuchman, G. (2008). Ike wears itself out beating up on Texas. [Website] Retrieved on September 15, 2008 from http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/09/13/hurricane.ike.texas/?xid=site cnnpartner Butler, P H. III. (1960, 2002). Past, present, and future: The place of the house museum in the museum community. In J. F. Donnelly (Ed .), Interpreting Historic House Museums 1842. Oxford: Altamira Press. Chew, R. (2002). In praise of the small m useum. American Association of Museums : Museum Ne ws [Website]. Retrieved on February 13, 2009 from http://www.aam us.org/pubs/mn/MN_MA02_SmallMuseums.cfm

PAGE 130

130 De Groft, A. H., Ph.D. & Weeks, D. C., Ph.D. (2004). C dZan: Inside the Ringling Mansion. Sarasota, FL : The John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art. Demeroukas, M., Lord, A., & Reno, C. ( Eds. ). (2001). Steal this Handbook! A Template for Creating a Museums Emergency Preparedness Plan. Jackson, MS: Southeastern Registrars Associati on. Donnelly, J.F. ( Ed. ). (2002). Interpreting Historic House Museums. Oxford: Altamira Press. Dorge, V. & Jones, S. L. (1999). Building an Emergency Plan: A Guide for Museums and Other Cultural Institutions. Los Angeles, CA: The Getty Conservation Insti tute. Feilden, B. M. (1986). Protection of our cultural heritage against natural disaster. In B.G. Jones (Ed.), Protecting Historic Architecture and Museum Collections from Natural Disaster 15 37. Boston: Butterworths. Florida Legislature Office of Prog ram Policy Analysis and Government Accountability. (2009). Review of State Owned Cultural Properties: Ringling Museum of Art and Coconut Grove Playhouse Report No. 9671, March 1997. [Website]. Retrieved on February 9, 2008 from http://www.oppaga.state.fl.us/reports/cultaff/r9671s.html Florida Legislature Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability. (2009). Two Department of State Divisions would Benefit Through Coordination and Grants Streamlining Report No. 0268, December 2002. [Website]. Retrieved on February 27, 2009 from http://www.oppaga.state.fl.us/monitor/reports/pdf/0268rpt.pdf Florida State University Ringling Center for the Cultural Arts. (2004). Index. [Website]. Retrieved on April 24, 2008 from http://www.fsu.edu/~ringling/index.html Gallagher, W. (2006). Hous e Thinking: A Room By Room Look at How We Live. New York: Harper Collins Publishers. Gifford, R. (2002). Environmental Psychology Principles and Practices ( 3rdHeritage Preservation. (2008). Heritage Emergency National Task Force. [Website]. Retrieved on August 15, 2008 from e d.) Canada: Optimal Books. Green, M. (1986). Reducing vulnerability. In B.G. Jones (Ed.), P rotecting Historic Architecture and Museum Collections from Natural Disaster 189196. Boston: Butterworths. Hardesty, D. L. & Little, B. J. (2000). Assessing Site Significance: A Guide for Archaeologists and Historians. New York: AltaMira Press. Heritag e Preservation. (2005). Before and After Disasters: Federal Funding for Cultural Institutions. Washington, D.C.: Heritage Preservation. http://www.heritagepreservation.org/programs/taskfer.htm

PAGE 131

131 Historic Spanish Point. (2008).History. [Website]. Retrieved on April 24, 2008 from http://www.historicspanishpoint.org/ Historic Spanish Point. (2008). Silver Anniversary Year: Annual Report 2007. Sarasota, FL : Gulf Coast Heritage Association, Inc. Holland, G. J. & Webster, P. J. (2007). Heightened Tropical Cyclone Activity in the North Atlantic: Natural Variability or Climate Trend? [Website]. Retrieved on February 4, 2008 from http://www.mmm.ucar.edu/people/holland/files/NaturalVariabilityOrClimateTrend.pdf Hunter, J.E. (1994). Museum disaster preparedness planning. In S. Knell (Ed.), Care of Collections 246261. New York: Routledge. Hupp, S. & Stewart, L. (1995). Historic Homes of Florida Sarasota, FL: Pineapple Press. IC OM Internati onal Committee DEMHIST. (2008). About DEMHIST. [Website]. Retrieved on March 31, 2008 from http://demhist.icom.museum/index.htm International Federation of Library Associations and Institut ions. (2000). Disaster Planning: Prevention, Preparedness, Response, Recovery. [Website]. Retrieved on September 13, 2008 from http://www.ifla.org.sg/VI/6/dswmedia/en/pdf/txt_sini.pdf John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art. (2008). About the Ringling. [Website]. Retrieved on February 18, 2008 from http://www.ringling.org/ J ones, B. G. (1986). Assessing d angers. In B.G. Jones (Ed.), Protecting Historic Architecture and Museum Collections from Natural Disaster 91118. Boston: Butterworths. Knell, S. ( Ed. ). (1994). Care of Collections. New York: Routledge. Kopec, D. (2006). Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild Publications, Inc. Larson, E. (1999). Isaacs Storm: a Man, a Time, and the Deadliest Hurricane in History New York: Crown Publishers. Leatherman, S. P. & Williams, J. (2008). Hurricanes. Minneapolis, MN: Voyageur Press. McDonald, R. (2003). Introduction to Natural and Manmade Disaster s and Their Effects on Buildings. Boston: Architectural Press. Murtagh, W. J. (2006). Keeping Time: The History and Theory of Preservation in America (3rd e d.). Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

PAGE 132

132 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad ministration (NOAA) Satellite and Information Service. (2006). Climate of 2005 Atlantic Hurricane Season. [Website]. Retrieved April 28, 2008 from http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2005/hurricanes05.html. National Oceanic and Atm ospheric Administration (NOAA) Satellite and Information Service. (2008). Climate of 2004 Atlantic Hurricane Season. [Website]. Retrieved April 28, 2008 from http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2004/hurricanes04.html National Register Information System. (2008). Web Query. [Database]. Retrieved on February 25, 2008 from http://www.nr.nps.gov/iwisapi/explorer.dll?IWS_SCHEMA=NRIS1&IWS_LOGIN=1&IWS _REPORT=100000066. National Science and Technology Council. (2003). Reducing Disaster Vulnerabili ty Through Science and Technology. Washington, D.C.: Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction. National Trust for Historic Preservation. (2008). About the National Trust for Historic Preservation. [Website]. Retrieved on June 9, 2008 from http://www.preservationnation.org/about us/ Nelson, C.L. (1991). Protecting the Past from Natural Disasters. Washington, D.C.: The Preservation Press. Sarasota County Arts Council. (2009). Grant Programs. [Website]. Retrieved on February 28, 2009 from http://www.sarasota arts.org/grant_programs.cfm Sarasota County Government Online. (2009). All Hazards Emergency Services. [Website]. Retrieved on Februa ry 25, 2009 from http://www.scgov.net/EmergencyServices/businessprep.asp Save Americas Treasures. (2008). About. [Website]. Retrieved on November 28, 2008 from http://www.saveamericastreasures.org/about.htm Save Americas Treasures. (2008). 1999 Federal Save Americas Treasures Grant Recipients. [Website]. Retrieved on February 11, 2008 from http://www.saveamericastreasures.org/grantrecipients.htm#Florida Scalera, M.A. (2006). C dZan, The Restoration of the Ringling Mansion Sarasota, FL : The John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art. Siekk inen, G. O. Jr. (1998). The recognition of significant historic character and fabric. In D.H.R. Spennemann & D.W. Look ( Eds .) Disaster Management Programs for Historic Sites 4548 San Francisco, CA: U.S. National Park Service. Sommer, B. & Sommer, R. ( 2002). A Practical Guide to Behavioral Research: Tools and Techniques (5th ed.) New York: Oxford University Press.

PAGE 133

133 Spennemann, D.H.R. & Look, D. W. (1998). From conflict to dialogue from dialogue to cooperation, from c ooperation to preservation. In D.H. R. Spennemann & D.W. Look ( Eds .) Disaster Management Programs for Historic Sites, 175188. San Francisco, CA: U.S. National Park Service. Spennemann, D.H.R. & Look, D. W. (1998). Managing disasters and managing disaster responses: A n introduction. In D.H .R. Spennemann & D. W. Look ( Eds .) Disaster Management Programs for Historic Sites, 16. San Francisco, CA: U.S. National Park Service. Stovel, H. (1998). Risk preparedness: A management manual for world cultural heritage. International Centre for the St udy of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property. [Website]. Retrieved on February 11, 2008 from http://www.iccrom.org/pdf/ICCROM_17_RiskPreparedness_en.pdf Stubbs, N (1990). Hurricane hazard: A theory of occupant s afety. In A. S. Nowak & T. V. Galambos (Ed s .), Making Buildings Safer for People: During Hurricanes, Earthquakes and Fires, 2858. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Tomasino & Associates, Inc. (2002). Proje ct Experiences: Special Projects. [Website]. Retrieved on February 11, 2008, from http://www.tomasinoassociates.com/project_other.html. Tyler, N. (2000). Historic Preservation: An Introduction to Its History, Principles, and Practice New York: W.W. Norton & Company. United States Environme ntal Protection Agency (1998). Cl imate Change and North Carolina. [Website]. Retrieved on February 27, 2009 from http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/GlobalWarming.nsf/UniqueKeyLookup/SHSU5BUTX6/$File/nc _impct.pdf University of Florida Institutional Review Board. (2008). Home Page. [Website]. Retrieved o n July 27, 2008 from http://irb.ufl.edu Upton, M.S. & Pearson, C. (1994). Emergency treatment of materials. In S. Knell (Ed.), Care of Collections 262275. New York: Routledge. Walter, J. J. (1991). Preface. In C. L. Nelson (Ed.), Protecting the Past from Natural Disasters 67. Washington, D.C.: The Preservation Press.

PAGE 134

134 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Jennifer Bassett was born in 1983 in New Orleans, Louisiana. In 1991, she relocated to Florida with her family. At the Univers ity of Fl orida, she completed a Bachelor of Arts in French with a minor in history. While finishing her bachelors degree she applied to the University of Floridas Master of Interior Design p rogram Her chief interest was to study design and historic p r eservation of interiors in the College of Design, Construction, and Planning. She received her Master of Interior Design from the University of Florida in 2009. Her main career interests are design and organizational consulting, but she maintains an arde nt fascination with history and preservation.