People may have replied off-list if information was sensitive, as I did
originally. I've revamped my reply, because I think the conversation is
important, and I'd also be interested in seeing other replies.

Short answer:
Percentages may tell more about values more than they do norms.

Long answer:

I don't know the size of museums inquiring, but my perspective is mostly
from small museums. (Budgets 50K - 200K + one 1.5M)  I suspect you'll
find a wide variation in budget percentages, but personnel will always
dominate a budget. I think in small museums with staff, personnel is
likely be a larger percentage. At museums where I worked and observed,
salaries varied from 60% to 90% of the budget. Budget for personnel are
likely to be highest in University or other government operated museums
because OPE (other payroll expense) is higher due to the generally more
generous benefit packages that are mandated in the larger organization.

I think the most important thing for Boards to realize is how much the
budget reflects the values of the organization, (aside from expenses
they do not have due to various circumstances, such as if city does
building maintenance). I've done a lot of MAP reviews and read at least
100 IMS-GOS grants, and budgets pretty always reflect what a museum and
its internal culture is like. If a museum puts greater value on
collections, changing exhibits, publications, museum education, etc.
that always will show in the budget. If these values are articulated at
budget time, their link to budgeting becomes more evident. (My
observation is that, in many museums and other non-profits, budgeting
often is seen as not very important except to avoid overspending.)  This
probably gives new meaning to the idea of a "balanced budget."

For example, the small museum where I volunteer now, spends only 60% on
personnel (that's $44,800 of a total $72,600 budget for 1 full time & 2
part time staff) and I feel that the staffing situation is poor. The
expectation is that they have a 'working' Board, who fill in for staff
(including Director), and this happens to an extent, but the results are
uneven, and some important things just don't happen. The exhibit budget
is about 13% of the budget, for three major exhibit changes a year,
quite high for this size museum, I think, and includes spending on
fairly lavish exhibit opening parties. It has about 2,500 sq. ft. of
exhibit space. A permanent exhibit uses about 500 sq. ft., and is half
finished at a cost of $43,000.  There is no budget for collection care &
management, even though collecting is in the mission, because having a
collection is seen as unaffordable due to space limitations (which is
only partially true --budgeting of space being another case of
priorities).

It seems to me that it isn't always so much *how much* you spend, but
how much you get done for what you do spend. Bottom line probably is
that you don't always 'get what you pay for' if you don't have the
expertise to assess quality and value. (Just like Christmas shopping?
:-) ) And that goes for staff as well as other things. Paying a little
more for staff may be most cost efficient in the long run if they can
take the rest of your money and make it go farther and use it to raise
more. Providing a "balanced" budget that is also balanced in allocations
for all aspects of mission based programming is the real goal.

Lucy Sperlin
(Retired but still working)

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).