#### STRATEGIC PLAN

######## FOR

##### 

##### 

##### *JEFFERSON NATIONAL EXPANSION MEMORIAL*

**ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI**

#### OCTOBER 1, 2000 -- SEPTEMBER 30, 2005

#  Recommended: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ 

**Kenneth G. Schaefer, Deputy Superintendent Date**

**Approved:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**Gary W. Easton, Superintendent Date**

# PREFACE

**The Government Performance Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) was enacted to
make the Federal Government both more effective and more efficient.
Effectiveness in doing the right things at the right time, and
efficiency in using resources wisely and without waste by reviewing the
\"cost to benefits\" ratio. In order to implement GPRA, all Federal
agencies were required to submit to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and to Congress, a Strategic Plan by September 30, 1997. The
attached is our updated five-year Strategic Plan for the period October
1, 2000, through September 30, 2005.**

**The National Park Service is engaged in the GPRA process of developing
a performance management system that measures results achieved \-- not
efforts expended. The value of the results achieved is the \"return on
investment\" made in the National Park Service by Congress and the
American people. To meet its mandate under GPRA, the National Park
Service has developed a Servicewide Strategic Plan that includes its
mission statement, mission goals, long-term goals, and external
analyses. This Servicewide Strategic Plan has been labelled the National
Park Service\'s [performance agreement]{.underline} with the American
people.**

**Since National Park Service field areas are as diverse as the reasons
for their individual establishment, one overall Strategic Plan could not
be developed to encompass all 379 units of the National Park Service and
the various administrative and support offices spread throughout the
United States, Guam, and the Virgin Islands. Therefore, each unit of the
National Park Service developed its own, tailor-made Strategic Plan to
meet the particular needs and demands of its unique cultural and natural
resources, its customers, and its partners. Park-specific Strategic
Plans bring together the Service\'s overall mission and long-term goals
with those of the local park.**

**As the stewards of the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial in St.
Louis, Missouri, and Ulysses S. Grant National Historic Site in St.
Louis County, we have developed Strategic Plans that incorporate
elements of the Servicewide Strategic Plan and at the same time address
the unique resources that we are charged with preserving and
protecting.**

**Specific and detailed information concerning costs for the next five
years (FY2001 through FY2005) and the operational process to implement
each park's plan are included. Also included are highlights from the
parks' resource assessment, discussion of key external factors, the
plan\'s program and evaluation schedule, and a list of those consulted
while developing the plans.**

**Gary W. Easton**

**Superintendent**

######## TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 5

About this plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 7

I. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Significance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

II\. Mission Goals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Goal Category I: Preserve Park Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Mission Goal Ia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 10

Mission Goal Ib. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 11

Goal Category II: Provide for Public Enjoyment and Visitor Experience. .
. . . . . 10

Mission Goal IIa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 10

> Mission Goal IIb. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . .10

Goal Category IV: Ensure Organizational Effectiveness. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 11

Mission Goal IVa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .11

Mission Goal IVb. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .11

III\. Long-term Goals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Ia5 - Historic Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Ia6 - Museum Collections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 12

Ia7 - Cultural Landscapes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 12

> IIb2 -- Cultural Resource Baselines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
>
> C -- Historic Structures Baseline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . 12
>
> D -- Museum Collections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . 12
>
> IIa1 - Visitor Satisfaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

IIa2 - Visitor Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

> IIb1 - Visitor Understanding and Appreciation . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . 13
>
> IIb1X -- Educational Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . 13
>
> IVa3A - Employee Performance Agreement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . 13
>
> IVa4 - Workforce Diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . 14
>
> A - Permanent Women/Minorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> 14
>
> B - Temporary/Seasonal Women/Minorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

C - Permanent Employees with Disabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

D - Seasonal Employees with Disabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

IVa6A - Employee Safety (Lost-Time Injury Rate) . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 14

IVa6B - Employee Safety (Continuation of Pay). . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 14

IVb1 - Volunteer Hours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 14

IVb2 - Donations and Grants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 14

> A - Cash Donations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . 14

B - In-kind Donations from Other Organizations. . . . . . . . . . 14

> C - In-kind Donations from Cooperating Association. . . . . . . . .14
>
> IVb4 - Fee Receipts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14

IV\. How Goals Will Be Accomplished. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

V. Program Assessment and Evaluation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

VI\. External Factors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

VII\. Schedule for Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

VIII\. Consultation and Strategic Plan Preparers. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

IX\. Park Location Maps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

# BACKGROUND

This *Strategic Plan* was written to fulfill the requirements of the
Government Performance and Results Act. Following is a brief overview of
that law, passed by the U.S. Congress in 1993.

It should be noted, however, that the *Strategic Plan* is much more than
just a response to legislative mandate. The law was a catalyst that
prompted the management staff of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial
to reexamine its fundamental mission and to take a fresh, longer range
view, in concrete terms, of what results or outcomes were needed in
order to achieve more effective and efficient accomplishment of that
mission. It caused the staff to reexamine the present condition of the
natural and cultural resources in their care, the current status of
visitor services, and the existing fiscal, human, and other resources at
their command. It pushed the focus beyond the usual daily activities and
products to take in the bigger picture of where the park is at and where
it needs to be. It encouraged the park staff to think and plan in new
ways. The effort was not easy. The results, however, are better
planning, better management, and better communication with all park
constituencies and stakeholders about where the park is, where it needs
to be, and how it is going to get there.

## Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (**GPRA**)

GPRA is one of the most recent and comprehensive of a number of laws and
executive orders directing federal agencies to join the "*performance
management revolution*" already embraced by private industry and many
local, state, and national governments.

In a nutshell, *performance management* ensures that daily actions and
expenditures of resources are guided by long- and short-term goal
setting in pursuit of accomplishing an organization's primary mission,
followed by performance measurement and evaluation. Importantly, the
goals are quantifiable and measurable results or outcomes, rather than
efforts or outputs (activities, services, products). The established and
proven performance management approach is to ***establish goals --
allocate resources to accomplish those goals -- take action/do the work
-- measure results -- evaluate and report performance -- use evaluation
to adjust goals and reallocate resources -- and continue the loop.***
This process sharpens the focus on accomplishing our mission in the most
efficient and effective ways, and holds managers and employees
accountable on a clear and measurable basis.

The approach seems so elegantly simple and logical that one is compelled
to ask, "Isn't that what everyone is already doing." In fact, most
federal agencies have not traditionally done business this way. They
have been funded and conducted their business by activities rather than
by goals. Too often they have conducted business year after year based
on what they have always routinely done, rather than in pursuit of
mission-oriented goals. Too often they have not measured their
performance in terms of results achieved, but rather in level of
activities conducted, products produced, or services provided -- if they
have measured performance at all. And too often managers and employees
have not been held accountable for their performance in achieving
concrete, results-oriented goals, and have not communicated the outcomes
of their work to their important constituencies -- the American people,
the Congress, even the President. So performance management, as embodied
in GPRA, is new, revolutionary, and vitally important to a more
effective, efficient, and credible federal government.

GRPA requires federal agencies to develop and use three primary
documents in conducting their business. These documents are also to be
submitted to the Congress and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB):

1.  **Strategic Plan** of no less than five years duration, reviewed and
    revised every three years, and containing:

-   [mission statement]{.underline} based in law, executive order, etc.;

-   [long-term goals]{.underline}, which are objective, quantified, and
    measurable, to accomplish mission;

-   [how goals will be accomplished]{.underline}, an adequate
    explanation including "...operational processes, skills and
    technology, and the human, capital, information and other resources
    required to meet those goals...;"

-   [relationship of annual goals to long term goals]{.underline}, a
    description of how long term goals are carried out in annual goal
    increments;

-   [key external factors]{.underline} which could positively or
    negatively affect goal accomplishment; and

-   [program evaluation methodology]{.underline}, a description of how
    mission and goals were arrived at and a schedule for future program
    evaluations.

-   [GPRA also requires consultation]{.underline} with affected and
    interested parties in the development of the Strategic Plan, and it
    requires that the plan be

-   [developed by federal employees]{.underline} (versus contractors,
    etc.).

2.  **Annual Performance Plan** tiered off the Strategic Plan each year,
    showing how long term goals will be accomplished in annual
    increments, and containing:

-   [annual goals]{.underline} to incrementally achieve long-term goals
    in Strategic Plan;

-   [annual work plan]{.underline}, i.e. explanation of how annual goals
    will be accomplished -- "briefly describe the operational processes,
    skills and technology, and the human, capital, information and other
    resources required to meet the performance goals....;" and

-   [basis for measuring results]{.underline} -- "...provide a basis for
    comparing actual program results with the established performance
    goals...." and "...describe the means to be used to verify and
    validate measured values."

3.  **Annual Performance Report** reviewing each year's successes and
    failures and identifying areas where activities or goals need to be
    revised in the future, addressing:

-   [what annual goals were met or exceeded;]{.underline}

-   [what annual goals were not met;]{.underline}

-   [why annual goals were not met; and]{.underline}

-   [what remedial action will be taken for goals not met.]{.underline}

    Importantly, GPRA mandates that long-term and annual goals be
    **results or outcomes** rather than outputs (activities, products,
    or services) and that they be "objective, quantifiable, and
    measurable" so that performance can be adequately measured and
    reported, progress on mission accomplishment assessed, and managers
    and employees held accountable.

    While the National Park Service has long been a mission-oriented
    organization, it has also had a long tradition of planning,
    managing, and budgeting by activity, problem solving and issue
    resolution. Its response to GPRA requirements will help it focus on
    accomplishing mission through establishing long-term and annual
    goals, allocating resources to those goals, and measuring and
    reporting results.

## About This Plan {#about-this-plan .unnumbered}

In consultation with Congress, OMB and other interested parties, the
National Park Service (NPS) developed its own unique GPRA implementation
process. Using this process, the NPS methodically developed its first
"servicewide" *Strategic Plan* and submitted it on September 30, 1997.
That plan was revised and published electronically on January 15, 2000.
A copy of revised plan is available for review at the Jefferson National
Expansion Superintendent's Office. It is also available on the Internet
at http://www.nps.gov.

The NPS manages the National Park System, which consists of over 375
units located in nearly every state and territory of the nation. Thus
the NPS is fundamentally a field-based, resource preservation and
visitor service organization, where results or outcomes actually occur
in the parks rather than Washington Office headquarters. In addition,
the NPS has legislated partnership responsibilities, carried out by
central offices throughout the country, to provide technical assistance
and grant funding to other non-federal preservation entities. Therefore,
as part of its GPRA implementation process, NPS decided that each of its
component parks, programs, and offices would develop and submit their
own Strategic Plans, Annual Performance Plans, and Annual Performance
Reports. The National Park Management Omnibus Act of 1998 codified into
law that all field units of the National Park System would write
Strategic Plans and Annual Performance Plans consistent with the
Government Performance and Results Act.

Each park's local plan addresses the long-term goals in the
"servicewide" plan that are appropriate to their individual unit as part
of the overall National Park System and its mission. Specific goals are
added to reflect each park's own legislative mandates, missions,
resources, visitor services, and issues. The local plans, then, are a
blend of national and local missions and goals.

This *Strategic Plan* for Jefferson National Expansion Memorial follows
this pattern. It is a five-year plan covering fiscal years 2001through
2005. It consists of a mission statement borne out of the NPS organic
act as well as the specific legislation establishing the park. It
contains [mission]{.underline} goals, closely paralleling the
"servicewide" mission goals. It then contains [long-term]{.underline}
goals, which target in quantified, measurable ways what the park will
accomplish in the next five years toward achieving its overall mission
goals and mission. The long-term goals address both appropriate
"servicewide" goals as well as park-specific outcomes. The goal
numbering protocol in general follows that of the "servicewide" plan.
Since not all servicewide goals apply to Jefferson National Expansion
Memorial, some numbers and categories are not included.

After the goal explanations, the plan contains a general section on "How
Goals will be Accomplished" which briefly sketches the park
organization, staffing, fiscal, infrastructure, and other resources
available to achieve the plan's long-term goals. This is followed in
turn by brief discussion of "Key External" factors over which park staff
may have influence but not control. These can positively or negatively
affect goal achievement.

Finally, there is a brief discussion of how the contents of the plan
were developed and a listing of those offices and persons consulted in
the development of the plan.

It should be noted that the goals in this plan are generally predicated
on "flat budgets" for the next five years. Other than increases for
inflation, the park staff assumed no major increases in funding. Where
increases in appropriations were known or are likely, they were taken
into account. Where other funding sources (donations, fee revenues,
etc.) were "reasonably assured", they too were taken into consideration
when setting performance targets. Obviously, limits on funding constrain
what can be accomplished toward the park's goals and mission. GPRA,
however, is distinctly not about discussing budget shortfalls or
requesting or justifying additional funding. Rather it is about
planning, managing, and communicating what can be accomplished with
known resources. Performance target numbers speak for themselves about
the funding available to the park to accomplish its mission; and where
targets are low, additional budget discussions might be generated.

Each year that the *Strategic Plan* is in effect, beginning with fiscal
year 2001 (October 1, 2000) there will be a companion *Annual
Performance Plan* which shows in [annual]{.underline} goals, that year's
targeted incremental achievement of each long-term goal and a work plan
for accomplishing that increment. Each year there will also be an
*Annual Performance Report* documenting actual achievement of the prior
year's annual goals and overall progress on long-term goals.

Additional copies of the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial Strategic
Plan are available from park headquarters at 11 North 4^th^ Street, St.
Louis, Missouri, 63102. Questions and comments are welcome and
encouraged and can be addressed to the park Superintendent at the
foregoing address. As they are written and approved, copies of the
current year's *Annual Performance Plan* and *Annual Performance Report*
will also be available on request, with questions and comments equally
welcome.

**I. INTRODUCTION**

This five-year *Strategic Plan* has been written for Jefferson National
Expansion Memorial, one of 379 units of the greater National Park System
administered by the National Park Service.

As a Federal agency, the National Park System preserves outstanding
representatives of the best of America's natural, cultural, and
recreational resources of national significance. These resources
constitute a significant part of America's heritage, character, and
future. Along with similar resources of local, state, tribal, and
national significance administered by other public and private
organizations and supported by National Park Service technical
assistance and grant funding support, Jefferson National Expansion
Memorial is a vital part of America's national system of parks and other
preserved resources. The National Park Service not only directly and
indirectly preserves these myriad national treasures, it also makes them
available to millions of visitors from throughout the country and the
world every year.

Jefferson National Expansion Memorial was established by Executive Order
7523, on December 21, 1935, as ordered by then President Franklin D.
Roosevelt. It is located on the western side of the Mississippi River in
downtown St. Louis, Missouri. Containing about 91 acres, the park was
established to commemorate a number of significant events in the history
of the United States: the transfer of the Louisiana Territory to the
United States, the westward movement of the American explorers and
pioneers, the establishment of the first cathedral and the first civil
government west of the Mississippi River, and the debate over slavery
raised by the Dred Scott case. The Gateway Arch, the Memorial's symoblic
gateway to the west, was designed by Eero Saarinen, the brilliant
Finnish-American architect whose design won an international competition
in 1947. Funds to construct the "Arch" were appropriated in 1954, and
construction of the Arch was started in 1963 and completed in 1965. At
630 feet high, it remains the nation's tallest monument. The underground
visitor center beneath the Gateway Arch houses two theaters, the 45,000
square foot Museum of Westward Expansion, a museum store, and visitor as
well as staff space. The park also includes the Old Courthouse where the
slave, Dred Scott, initiated his suit for freedom just prior to the
Civil War. Also included within the boundaries of the park is a historic
inholding, the Old Cathedral. Operated by the St. Louis Archdiocese, it
is the oldest cathedral west of the Mississippi River. Jefferson
National Expansion Memorial plays an important role in telling the story
of America's heritage especially as it relates to the country's westward
expansion during the 19^th^ century. Annual visitation is close to 4
million persons. The Gateway Arch, the centerpiece of the Memorial, has
come to be regarded as a national treasure with an artistic and
architectural significance of its own, which perhaps transcends the
themes it was intended to commemorate.

In 1984, Congress authorized the enlargement of the 91-acre Memorial to
include up to 100 acres on the east bank of the Mississippi River in
East St. Louis, Illinois. Congress chose to expand the park in
recognition of the historical linkage of the east and west riverbanks
during the period of U.S. westward expansion and because of the broad
national and international significance and appeal of the Gateway Arch,
which is situated directly across the river from the new addition.
Presently, the expansion of the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial is
"on hold." Although funds were authorized to begin the initial land
acquisition, Congress placed a moratorium upon such land acquisition by
the National Park Service in the fiscal year 1998 Appropriations Bill.
The moratorium remains in effect, and the prospect of actual expansion
of the park into the State of Illinois on the east bank of the
Mississippi River has faded. Land ownership and the land-use pattern has
changed dramatically over the past few years with the introduction of a
multi-million dollar riverboat gaming facility, a several hundred car
parking lot, a recreation vehicle park, and a \$35 million hotel. In
addition, other development has been proposed by private developers to
include a museum, a major music/entertainment center, and a marina.

[\*Note]{.underline}: In April, 1999, Ulysses S. Grant NHS was placed
under the administrative and management control of the Superintendent of
Jefferson NEM. Located 14 miles from Jefferson NEM in St. Louis County,
it is a relatively new, developing area in its transition years. Open
for limited public visitation, there is major restoration work being
performed to bring the area into conformance with its General Management
Plan. For GPRA and strategic planning purposes, Ulysses S. Grant NHS has
its own five-year Strategic Plan; and although managed under Jefferson
NEM, it is treated as a separate unit within the National Park Service.

**[MISSION]{.underline}**

> **"The mission of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial is to
> preserve, conserve, protect, and maintain those resources within its
> charge for the enjoyment of this and future generations. The park
> staff is dedicated to carrying out its role as stewards for the
> park\'s unique resources, as teachers and guides for the visitor, and
> as advocates for partnering resources."**

## 

## **PURPOSE**

> **"The purpose of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial is to
> commemorate**
>
> **St. Louis' role in the westward expansion of the United States
> during the 19^th^ century and to foster an awareness of the cultural
> groups involved in exploring, exploiting, and inhabiting the western
> lands from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean."**

# 

# [SIGNIFICANCE]{.underline}

##  

**"Jefferson National Expansion Memorial commemorates significant
events**

**involving St. Louis' role in the westward expansion of the United
States during the**

**19^th^ century. These include the transfer of the Louisiana Territory
to the United**

**States, the Lewis and Clark expedition of 1804-06, and the City's
prominence in the**

**story of the explorers, fur trappers, overland pioneers, American
Indians and**

**others who made the westward journey. The park also commemorates the**

**significance of the Dred Scott case which began in the Old Courthouse,
divided**

**North and South over the extension of slavery into the western
territories, and led**

**to the Civil War. The soaring Gateway Arch, designed by Eero Saarinen,
is one of**

**the world\'s great sculptural and architectural achievements, a
tangible symbol of**

**St. Louis as the 'Gateway to the West.'"**

## 

## **II. MISSION GOALS**

**Jefferson National Expansion Memorial's mission is accomplished
through pursuit of the following broad, "in perpetuity" Servicewide
mission goals**:

### [Goal Category I \-- Preserve Jefferson National Expansion Memorial Resources:]{.underline}

> **Ia Cultural resources and associated values at Jefferson National
> Expansion Memorial are protected, restored and maintained in good
> condition and managed within their cultural context.**
>
> **Ib Jefferson National Expansion Memorial contributes to knowledge
> about cultural resources and associated values; management decisions
> about cultural resources are based on adequate scholarly
> information.**

### [Goal Category II \-- Provide for the Public Use and Enjoyment and Visitor Experience of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial:]{.underline}

> **IIa Visitors to Jefferson National Expansion Memorial safely enjoy
> and are satisfied with the availability, accessibility, diversity, and
> quality of park facilities, services, and appropriate educational
> opportunities.**
>
> **IIb Park visitors and the general public understand and appreciate
> the preservation of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial and its
> resources for this and future generations.**

Goal Category III \-- Strengthen and Preserve Natural and Cultural
Resources and Enhance Recreational Opportunities Managed by Partners:

> (This mission goal category refers primarily to the legislated
> National Park Service partnership programs and is accomplished by
> central offices rather than parks; therefore, Jefferson National
> Expansion Memorial has no goals listed under this goal category.)

# [Goal Category IV \--Ensure Organizational Effectiveness of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial:]{.underline}

> **IVa The National Park Service at Jefferson National Expansion
> Memorial uses current management practices, systems, and technologies
> to accomplish its mission.**
>
> **IVb The National Park Service at Jefferson National Expansion
> Memorial increases its managerial capabilities through initiatives and
> support from other agencies, organizations, and individuals.**

# III. LONG-TERM GOALS

During the next five years -- fiscal years 2001 through 2005 -- the park
will achieve the following specific long-term goals in pursuit of its
mission and mission goals at Jefferson National Expansion Memorial.
These long-term goals are objective, quantified, and measurable. Due
dates, performance indicators, performance target numbers, desired
condition, and baselines, as appropriate, are imbedded in each goal
statement in order to avoid separate long lists of performance measures.
Each long-term goal is listed in the context of the mission goal it is
targeting to achieve.

Category I Mission and Long Term Goals:

**Mission Goal Ia: Cultural resources and associated values at Jefferson
National Expansion Memorial are protected, restored and maintained in
good condition and managed within their cultural context.**

**Mission Goal Ib: Jefferson National Expansion Memorial contributes to
knowledge about cultural resources and associated values; management
decisions about cultural resources are based on adequate scholarly
information.**

The park is dedicated to preserving and conserving its cultural
resources for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and
future generations. Park long-term goals related to this category
include the protection, restoration, and maintenance of historic
structures and objects, research collections, and cultural traditions
relevant to the purpose and/or significance of the park. Long-term goals
that deal with protection of cultural landscapes from disturbance and
encroachment of development also relate to this category. When
management decisions are made which directly affect the treatment or
condition of the park's cultural resources, park staff must ensure that
they are based upon the most current and accurate baseline information
available. Other park long-term goals related to this category include
establishing, verifying, and maintaining current baseline information on
historic structures and museum collections.

Long Term Goals:

> **[Ia5 Historic Structures]{.underline} - By September 30, 2005, 13 of
> 15 (86%) of the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial historic
> structures listed on the National Park Service List of Classified
> Structures at the end of fiscal year 1999, are in good condition.**
>
> **[Ia6 Museum Collections]{.underline} - By September 30, 2005, 136
> (73%) of 186 applicable preservation and protection standards for
> Jefferson National Expansion Memorial's museum collections are met.**
>
> **[Ia7 Cultural Landscapes]{.underline} - By September 30, 2005, two
> (100%) of two Jefferson National Expansion Memorial cultural
> landscapes on the 1999 National Park Service Cultural Landscapes
> Inventory (CLI) with condition information are in good condition.**
>
> **[Ib2C Historic Structures Baseline]{.underline} -- By September 30,
> 2005, all 15 (100%) of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial's
> historic structures on the FY 1999 List of Classified Structures have
> updated information in their LCS records.**
>
> **[Ib2D Museum Collections]{.underline} -- By September 30, 2005, the
> number of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial's museum objects
> catalogued into the National Park Service Automated National Catalog
> System (ANCS+) and submitted to the National Catalog is increased from
> 199,56l in FY 1999 to 271,403 (36% increase).**

Category II Mission and Long Term Goals:

**Mission Goal IIa: Visitors to Jefferson National Expansion Memorial
safely enjoy and are satisfied with the availability, accessibility,
diversity, and quality of park facilities, services, and appropriate
educational opportunities.**

**Mission Goal IIb: Park visitors and the general public understand and
appreciate the preservation of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial and
its resources for this and future generations.**

Enjoyment of the park and its resources is a fundamental part of the
visitor experience. Visitors\' enjoyment and safety are directly
affected by the quality of park facilities and services. Park long-term
goals related to this goal category include the availability, quality,
and diversity of park facilities and services; and accessibility for
special populations.

**Long Term Goals:**

> **[IIa1 Visitor Satisfaction]{.underline} -- By September 30, 2005,
> 95% of visitors to Jefferson National Expansion Memorial are satisfied
> with appropriate park facilities, services, and recreational
> opportunities.**
>
> **[IIa2 Visitor Safety]{.underline} -- By September 30, 2005, the
> visitor accident/incident rate at Jefferson National Expansion
> Memorial is maintained at its FY 1992-1996 five-year rate of 6.15 per
> 100,000 visitor days.**
>
> **[IIb1 Visitor Understanding and Appreciation]{.underline} -- By
> September 30, 2005, 86% of Jefferson**
>
> **National Expansion Memorial visitors understand the significance of
> the park.**
>
> **[IIb1X Educational Programs]{.underline} -- By September 30, 2005,
> 90% of 125,000 participants in Jefferson National Expansion Memorial's
> formal educational programs understand America's cultural and natural
> heritage preserved by the National Park Service.**

Category IV Mission and Long Term Goals:

**Mission Goal IVa: The National Park Service at Jefferson National
Expansion Memorial uses current management practices, systems, and
technologies to accomplish its mission.**

**Mission Goal IVb: The National Park Service at Jefferson National
Expansion Memorial increases its managerial capabilities through
initiatives and support from other agencies, organizations, and
individuals.**

To be responsive, efficient, cost-effective, and accountable, the park
must integrate its planning, management, accounting, reporting, and
other information resource systems. Park long-term goals related to this
goal category include work force diversity, employee safety, employee
performance, organizational responsiveness, and partnering with other
entities for maximum public benefit.

**[Long Term Goals]{.underline}:**

**[IVa3 Workforce Development and Performance:]{.underline}**

> **[IVa3A -- Employee Performance Agreements]{.underline} -- By
> September 30, 2005, 100% of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial
> employee performance plans are linked to appropriate strategic and
> annual performance goals and position competencies.**

**[IVa4 Workforce Diversity]{.underline}:**

> **[IVa4A -- Permanent Women/Minorities]{.underline} -- By September
> 30, 2005, the number of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial
> permanent positions in the 9 targeted occupational series filled by
> employees from underrepresented groups is increased from 16 at the end
> of FY 1999 to 20 (25% increase).**
>
> **[IVa4B -- Temporary/Seasonal Women/Minorities]{.underline} - By
> September 30, 2005, the number of Jefferson National Expansion
> Memorial temporary/seasonal positions annually filled by women and
> minorities is maintained at the end of FY 1999 level of 27 (which
> represents 75% of the total seasonal workforce).**
>
> **[IVa4C -- Permanent Employees with Disabilities]{.underline} -- By
> September 30, 2005, the number of Jefferson National Expansion
> Memorial permanent positions filled by employees with targeted
> disabilities is increased from 5 in FY 1999 to 6 (20% increase).**
>
> **[IVa4D -- Seasonal Employees with Disabilities]{.underline} - By
> September 30, 2005, the number of Jefferson National Expansion
> Memorial temporary/seasonal positions filled by employees with
> targeted disabilities is increased from 1in FY 1999 to 2 (100%
> increase).**

**[IVa6 Employee Safety]{.underline}:**

> **[IVa6A -- Employee Lost --Time Injury Rate]{.underline} -- By
> September 30, 2005, the number of Jefferson National Expansion
> Memorial employee lost-time injuries is maintained at or below its FY
> 1992-1996 five-year annual average of to 3.375 per 200,000 labor hours
> worked (100 FTE).**
>
> **[IVa6B -- Number of Hours of Continuation of Pay]{.underline} -- By
> September 30, 2005, the number of Jefferson National Expansion
> Memorial hours of Continuation of Pay (COP) will be at or below 700.**
>
> **[IVb1 Volunteer Hours]{.underline} -- By September 30, 2005, the
> number of Jefferson National Expansion Memorial volunteer hours is
> increased from 36,000 in FY 1997 to 39,600 (10% increase).**

**[IVb2 Donations and Grants:]{.underline}**

> **[IVb2A -- Cash Donations]{.underline} -- By September 30, 2005, cash
> donations to Jefferson National Expansion Memorial are increased from
> \$440,000 in 1997 to \$462,000 (5% increase).**
>
> **[IVb2B -- In-kind Donations from Other Organizations]{.underline} -
> By September 30, 2005, the cash value of in-kind donations and
> services provided to Jefferson National Expansion Memorial from other
> organizations is increased from \$55,000 in FY 1997 to \$110,000 (100%
> increase).**
>
> **[IVb2C -- In-kind Donations from Cooperating
> Association]{.underline} -- By September 30, 2005, the cash value of
> in-kind donations and services provided to Jefferson National
> Expansion Memorial from the Jefferson National Parks Association is
> maintained at the FY 1997 level of \$719,000.**
>
> **[IVb4 Fee Receipts]{.underline} -- By September 30, 2005, Jefferson
> National Expansion Memorial receipts from park entrance, recreation,
> and other fees are increased from \$1,377,479 in FY 1997 to
> \$2,066,218 (50% increase).**

**IV. HOW GOALS WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED**

Current human and fiscal resources available to achieve the park's goals
and carry out its mission include an annual base operating budget of
approximately \$6.7 million, a permanent work force of approximately 125
permanent positions and 20+ seasonal positions. This work force is
supplemented annually by 36,000 hours of Volunteers-in-Parks staff.
During the 5-year life of this Strategic Plan for Jefferson National
Expansion Memorial, it is estimated that implementation of the overall
plan to manage the park will cost approximately \$33.5 million and
require a total of 625 FTE\'s. This assumes a flat budget from FY 2001
through FY 2005.

The park staff is directed by a Superintendent and Deputy
Superintendent. The staff is organized into four operating divisions:
Rangers Activities, Museum Services and Interpretation, Maintenance, and
Administration. Jefferson NEM is allocated annually approximately 135
FTE\'s and an ONPS base funding level of \$6.7 million (as per the Green
Book for FY00). The staff breakdown by FTE is as follows:

> [Organization]{.underline} [Allocation]{.underline} [Total
> Staff]{.underline}

Superintendent\'s Office\...\...\... 5\* 3.7%

Law Enforcement\...\...\...\...\..... 40 29.7%

Museum Services/Interp...\... 41 30.4%

Maintenance....\...\...\...\...\...\..... 37 27.4%

Administration\.......\...\...\...\.... [12]{.underline}
[8.8%]{.underline}

Totals\...\.................\...\...\.....135 100.0%

\*Includes Safety Officer and Special Park Uses Staff Specialist.

Approximate ONPS breakdown by division (organizational component) is as
follows:

ONPS Annual Percent of

[Organization]{.underline} [Allocation]{.underline} [ONPS
\$\$\$\$]{.underline}

Superintendent\' Office\...\.... \$ 423,000 6.3%

Law Enforcement\...\...\...\..... 2,035,000 30.1%

Museum Services/Interp.. 1,732,000 25.6%

Maintenance\...\...\...\...\...\... 1,632,000 24.1%

Administration\...\...\...\...\... 623,000 9.2%

Utilities\...\...\...\...\...\..... [322,000]{.underline}
[4.7%]{.underline}

Totals\...\...\...\..... \$6,767,000 100.0%

Jefferson National Expansion Memorial was selected to participate in the
Recreational Fee Demonstration Program in mid-FY 1998. Effective March
1, 1998, the park assumed responsibility for the management and
operation of the two theaters located in the underground visitor center
complex/facility beneath the Gateway Arch. Expected gross revenue from
operation of both theaters is estimated to be about \$1 million
annually. This coupled with gross revenue generated from the
Congressionally-mandated entrance fees which equates to \$1.3 million
annually, would result is about \$2.3 million gross revenue annually to
the park. Out of the gross revenue, the costs of collection, costs of
operations (recovery), and the Service\'s 20% share of gross revenue are
deducted. The net revenue to the park should be about \$1-1.5 million
annually. The intended use of this new funding is to address those
critical health and safety issues, backlogged infrastructure/maintenance
projects, and other high-dollar projects, which have not been
successfully funded in prior years through other funding sources, e.g.,
line-item construction, soft dollar funding (cyclic and
repair/rehabilitation), and base budget increases. Projects already
funded or soon-to-be funded include replacement of all electrical panels
in the underground Arch visitor center complex (\$800,000), redesigning
the Arch\'s aged and inefficient HVAC system (\$1,000,000), and
restoration of the 33 chimneys atop the Old Courthouse which have been
found to be unsafe and hazardous (\$258,000). Additional future high
priority projects under this Program include major restoration work to
the exterior of the Old Courthouse, e.g., roof replacement (\$850,000)
and cornice repair (\$1,300,000).

# V. PROGRAM ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION

[Old Courthouse:]{.underline}

Jefferson NEM\'s 90+ acres occupy the original site of early St. Louis,
however, the site has been greatly disturbed to a considerable depth
over the years and little if anything of historic significance likely
remains under the surface except where the Old Courthouse stands.

The interpretive programs at the Old Courthouse serve over 130,000
visitors annually. The themes presented trace the many historic events
that transpired in the Old Courthouse and in the City of St. Louis. The
Old Courthouse\'s most famous event was the Dred Scott decision. Four
exhibit galleries house permanent exhibits on the history of St. Louis,
one small gallery houses an exhibit on the competition surrounding the
Arch, other visitor facilities include courtrooms, theater, and an
orientation room. Thousands of students participate in curriculum-based
education programs that highlight the park\'s significance.

One of the more interesting programs at the Old Courthouse is the
temporary exhibit program. This program hosts major traveling shows
throughout the year, i.e., Arts for the Parks. All special exhibits
strengthen the themes associated with the park or National Park Service.

The Old Courthouse is by far the most threatened of the park\'s cultural
resources. Of the cultural resources recognized in the park only the Old
Courthouse has noteworthy significance in history. It is on the National
Register of Historic Places and is one of the oldest governmental
buildings in the trans‑Mississippi West. Small and old‑fashioned as it
may seem in comparison with the tall, massive, modern structures today,
it dominated the city\'s skyline when the covered wagons rolled west in
the mid‑1800\'s. It stands over 190 feet tall, 100 feet taller than most
of the surrounding buildings in 1862.

The Old Courthouse was built between 1839 and 1862. It is an outstanding
example of 19th century Greek Revival public architecture. Its
Italianate cast iron and copper dome supported by a lightweight iron
skeletal design was the first of its type built in the United States,
and was completed 1-2 years before the similarly designed dome on the
United States Capitol in Washington D.C. The building was built of
Missouri limestone and brick.

Presently, the Old Courthouse is in need of major restoration and
rehabilitation work. The roof and exterior cornices are in need of major
repair, and water intrusion is destroying some historic fabric inside
the building.

In 1997/98, two studies were conducted on the Old Courthouse. One
assessed the condition of cornices above the public areas, and the other
was a structural/seismic study of the chimneys. The cornice study
revealed they were in need of \$422,000 worth of repairs over the next 2
years and recommended an additional \$117,000 be scheduled in cyclic
maintenance every 2 years to keep ahead of the deterioration. In
addition, the study recommended \$1.1 million of repair costs over the
next 10 years. (Bear in mind these treatment recommendations apply only
to the cornices above the public areas. The cornices above the
non-public areas \-- in the 4 courtyards surrounding the Old Courthouse
-- were assessed in 1999 and were found to require major restoration
work as well.)

The structural/seismic study of the 33 chimneys revealed that all 33
chimneys were in various states of deterioration, some in serious
deterioration requiring emergency stabilization. The total cost to
stabilize, rebuild, and/or tuckpoint all 33 chimneys was estimated at
\$350,000. In fiscal years 1999 and 2000 all 33 chimneys were either
rebuilt or restored using revenues from the Recreational Fee
Demonstration Program.

There is water intrusion from the outside to the inside of the building
and a faulty roof is suspected. A structural study begun in 1997/98
answered some of the questions concerning structural stability of the
building itself as well as the water intrusion issue. It was found that
the Old Courthouse would require about \$13 million worth of structural
work to make it "earthquake" proof, and that does not include any
funding needed to move staff and administrative offices and temporarily
relocate them during the 2-3 years of construction work.

The Rotunda of the Old Courthouse contains 24 murals by various artists,
including the noted artist Carl Wimar. No conservation of any of the
murals has been performed since the 1950\'s. A survey of the murals
completed by a National Park Service Conservator was completed in 1985
and showed that the murals needed cleaning, paint was flaking from 23 of
the murals, and 15 of the 24 exhibited blind cleavage and/or unsound
support. Nearly all of the murals were defined as being in a state of
\"accurate insecurity\" requiring immediate conservation treatment.

[Gateway Arch:]{.underline}

The 630\' high stainless steel Gateway Arch symbolizes St. Louis\' role
as the Gateway to the West. The Memorial was designed by Architect Eero
Saarinen, winner of the 1947 competition sponsored by the Territorial
Expansion Commission. As the dominating feature of the park, the Gateway
Arch was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1987. The Arch is a
unique structure, an eloquent expression of the westward expansion theme
in the form of an inverted catenary curve. Designed to stand 1000 years
and built at a cost of \$11.5 million, it took 2 years to construct and
was completed in 1965.

The Arch shape is faithful to the Saarinen design; however, many
adjustments were made over the years as other details of his plan were
designed and constructed, e.g., the Monumental Staircase, the
landscaping and grounds, the visitor center, etc. The Gateway Arch is in
basically good condition but structural studies are needed to ascertain
if any deterioration has occurred over the past 35 years. Like any
physical facility, a specific level of continuous preventative and
ongoing maintenance is required to keep the facility in such condition.

[Gateway Arch Visitor Center:]{.underline}

The Museum of Westward Expansion, the Tucker Theater, and Odyssey
Theater are the principal interpretive resources in the park. All are
located below ground beneath the Gateway Arch in the George B. Hartzog,
Jr. Visitor Center which is approximately 109,000 square feet in size.

The Museum of Westward Expansion houses permanent museum exhibits,
supplemented with special exhibits on specific thematic subjects, and
live interpretive events which all combine to convey the experience of
the people who settled and lived in the American West. This 43,000+
square foot facility was designed to present the extensive and complex
story symbolically. This structure provides space for the exhibits which
contain 1,200 graphics and more than 600 artifacts of the period.
Exhibit materials range [from]{.underline} small items such as
photographs, personal items and tools [to]{.underline} mounted animals,
replicas of a bullboat, an overland wagon, and representations of a sod
house and a tipi, [to]{.underline} state-of-the-art animatronic figures
which tell the complete story of Indian Peace Medals. The presentation
of the stories departs from traditional museum displays and has been
highly controversial within the National Park Service curatorial ranks.
Overall, however, the design and concept has been approved, endorsed,
and applauded by museum professionals, historians, and high-level
National Park Service management. It was one of the first museums in the
Service to be accredited by the American Association of Museums.

The exhibit plan concept presents the story of westward expansion from
the point of view of the various peoples and cultures involved in the
acquisition and settlement of the West in a manner which enables the
visitor to identify directly with the people in the story. Each group
(soldiers, American Indians, settlers, cowboys, etc.) is interpreted
with a combination of photographs, quotations, personal items, tools and
related animal dioramas.

Images of historic events and the people involved are exhibited whenever
possible in life‑size scale. A sense of time in history is provided by
developing a chronological order within the overall design. Emphasis is
placed on utilizing appropriate photographs, plants, animal displays,
artifacts, murals, and other exhibit material to present the natural
face of the land in a realistic manner as a unique and critical force in
the story of westward expansion.

The Museum of Westward Expansion is in basically sound condition. There
are concerns with high humidity which can and does affect museum objects
and photo murals. Carpeting has to be replaced periodically, and
exhibits and mounts require continuous monitoring, maintenance, and
curatorial treatment. In 1995/96, the museum was totally repainted and
new exhibit labels installed. In addition, many exhibits were either
replaced in-kind or treated to renew them; and new exhibit mounts were
designed and installed. In 1998/99, the entire museum was re-carpeted
and in 1999/00, the large Lewis and Clark dye-transfer photo murals were
replaced with new murals utilizing state-of-the-art digital technology.

Tucker Theater and Odyssey Theater are also located in the underground
visitor center. Tucker Theater, finished in 1968, is a standard 35mm
type theater with about 285 seats. It features the film, \"Monument to
the Dream,\" a documentary-type film which chronicles the building of
the Gateway Arch. Tucker Theater was renovated in 1997-98 complete with
a new brick mural facade and an interior facelifting which includes new
seats, carpeting, and a viewing area for disabled visitors. Funds
permitting, a new projection system and sound system will be added
later.

Odyssey Theater, a 255 seat state-of-the-art \"large screen\" theater
was completed in 1993. Odyssey is the National Park Service\'s first and
only 70mm format, large screen theater located within an NPS area and
operated under the management and direction of the Service. Built at a
cost of about \$3.5 million, it uses the medium of 70mm format films and
a four-story high screen to convey National Park Service interpretive
themes and related missions. Movies in Odyssey are changed from time to
time.

In 1999, the Arch tram queue areas were completely renovated at a cost
of approximately \$2.2 million. The North Queue Area interprets the
design and construction of the Gateway Arch, and the South Queue Area
interprets the St. Louis riverfront of the mid-19^th^ century. These
areas contain interactive exhibits and state-of-the-art audiovisual and
multimedia systems which convey the themes of St. Louis as the Gateway
to the West as well as the symbolism of the Gateway Arch itself.

[Park Grounds (Cultural Landscape):]{.underline}

Eero Saarinen envisioned the Arch rising up from a heavily wooded
landscape to symbolize the gateway to the western wilderness. Thus, the
landscape grounds, especially the number and variety of trees, are an
integral part of the Memorial design. Saarinen did not determine the
specific placement and species of the trees. Their location and variety
are not significant but the variety and quantity of trees form a visual
and symbolic impact which is necessary to fulfill the Saarinen concept.

The landscaping of the Arch grounds was completed in 1980. In 1995-1996,
a Cultural Landscape Plan (CLP) was developed to guide park management
in the maintenance of the park's landscape. Since the completion of the
1996 Cultural Landscape Plan, about 25 of the recommendations from the
CLP have been accomplished. During the next few years, the remaining
recommendations in the Cultural Landscape Plan will be prioritized for
implementation.

As of 1999, the inventory of the plantings on the grounds is follows:

Trees...................................2,122

Shrubs.................................7,351

Ground Cover........................1.75 acres

Lawn Area............................47.5 acres

Reflection Pools.....................Two: South Pond = 1.34 acres, North
Pond = 1.7 acres

Sidewalks.............................5 miles

Irrigation System....................1,300 heads

Pipes..................................12.75 miles

Fiber Optic System...............\...1 system

External CCTV system.............25 closed-circuit cameras

The forgoing has changed somewhat over the past 30+ years, thus the need
for a Cultural Landscape Plan (CLP). The CLP documents the original
design as accurately as possible, provides recommendations for
management of the landscape, and sets forth all that has transpired up
to the present day regarding the landscape and the changes which have
taken place since its inception. The CLP document has provided
management with a solid basis for managing the grounds and keeping the
landscape as close to the original concept as possible.

As of 1999 the Park had two Cultural Landscapes in the Service's
Cultural Landscapes Inventory (CLI). They were listed as (1) the entire
Memorial in "good" condition; and, (2) the Gateway Arch Grounds in
"good" condition.

######### 

######### Park Visitor-Use Pattern:

Visitor-use pattern in the park has been rather stable for the past 20
years or more. In 1996, the 4 million mark was surpassed in total
numbers of visitors. Of that figure, over 3 million visit inside the
park\'s facilities (Arch and Old Courthouse) and participate in a
variety of program activities.

Most visitors come from Missouri and Illinois, with adjacent states next
and other states and nations represented in inverse proportion to their
distance from St. Louis. Additional analysis of park users and use
patterns indicates:

Visitors to the top of the Arch -- 975,638 (Fiscal Year 1997)

Breakdown by Point of Origin:

15% ‑ Local residents who live within St. Louis City or County

17% ‑ Regional residents who live within a 2‑3 hour drive

63% ‑ U.S. citizens living outside the regional area

5% ‑ International visitors

Breakdown by Destination:

25% ‑ Home‑based visitors who return home after a day trip

75% ‑ Visitors who are passing through on an extended trip

Breakdown by Area and Facilities Used:

10% ‑ Utilize park for leisure recreation not related to park purpose

90% ‑ Utilize park developed area for activity related to park purpose

0% ‑ Utilize park undeveloped resources (park has none)

0% ‑ Utilize park resources for detrimental activities (less than 1%)

Breakdown of Interpretive Program Use:

[Arch Visitor Center]{.underline} (2,201,288)

Museum\...\...............\...\...\...\...\... 57%

Top of Arch..............\...\...\...\.... 38%

Theaters\...\................\...\...\...\..... 12%

School Programs\..............\...\..... 2%

Orientation Talks.........\...\...\...\... 1%

MWE Public Programs\.........\.... 1%

[Old Courthouse]{.underline} (137,493)

Information Desk...........\...\...\... 74%

Orientation Talks.........\...\...\...\... 2%

School Programs.........\...\...\...\... 12%

Theater\...\...\...\...................\...\.... 8%

Public Programs..........\...\...\...\.... 4%

The most heavily visited times and months of the year for the park are
summer, followed by spring, then fall, and last winter.

# 

# [Park Partners:]{.underline}

Jefferson National Expansion Memorial enjoys partnerships with three
distinct not-for-profits, i.e., the Jefferson National Parks Association
(cooperating association), the Bi-State Development Agency
(quasi-government agency), and Fair Saint Louis (a local
not-for-profit). The Jefferson National Parks Association annually
donates approximately \$550,000 of in-kind contributions to the park.
They operate the Arch Museum Shop (a retail sales outlet located in the
underground visitor center complex with annual retail sales of about \$4
million) and a retail catalog book outlet (also located in the
underground visitor center complex). Proceeds from both of these
activities help support the park's education and interpretive programs.
They also, under a concession permit, sell film and convenience items
within their retail sales outlet.

Bi-State Development Agency operates the Arch Transportation System
(tram system) which carries visitors to the top of the 630' high Gateway
Arch and the 1300+ space Arch Parking Garage. They operate under a
Cooperative Agreement which is in effect until the year 2013. They also
operate the Arch Ticketing Center where park visitors pay the
Congressionally-mandated park entrance fee and purchase tickets for a
tram ride or one of two movies. They collect the park's entrance and
user fees under a formalized General Agreement with the park. In
addition, they work closely with park management officials in marketing
the tram ride and the two theaters operated by the park.

Fair Saint Louis annually underwrites the costs and sponsors the annual
Fourth of July celebration, Fair Saint Louis. This annual 3-day event,
held on the park grounds, is funded by donations from local businesses
and corporate sponsors. Billed as the "nation's biggest birthday party"
and the City's largest annual civic event, the park hosts and manages
this event under the auspices of a Special Use Permit which is issued to
the City of St. Louis. This event literally draws hundreds of thousands
of visitors to the park over a 3-4 day period. Although the park does
not directly benefit monetarily from this annual event, the primary
advantage to the National Park Service is the association formed with
local business and corporation leaders in the St. Louis metropolitan
area. This annual event started in 1981 and has continued to date.
Pre-planning for the event takes place over several months usually
starting in January. The event itself is staffed with thousands of
volunteers from in and around the St. Louis area.

#  

# VI. EXTERNAL FACTORS AFFECTING THE PARK

Legislative and political challenges to the mission and management of
the National Park Service (NPS) require that Jefferson NEM capably,
reasonably, and factually respond to the private or public sectors. Both
the changing demographics of park visitors and the general public
challenge the park to find new and relevant means of providing
interpretive/educational services while at the same time preserve and
protect its resources for enjoyment of future generations. Local
government and special interest groups require that the park develop an
effective means of communicating the Service\'s and the park\'s goals
and policies to avoid external pressures for non-compatible use of the
park and its resources. At the same time, the park cannot exist as a
single entity, but must be part of the community within which it is
located.

Four external factors/issues have a direct bearing on Jefferson NEM\'s
park operations and its ability to continue providing the same high
quality and level of visitor services over the next few years. The first
external factor is \"St. Louis 2004,\" a local initiative headed by
former U.S. Senator Danforth. Their group is dedicated to making
substantial improvements in the greater St. Louis metropolitan area by
the year 2004, hence its name. They wish to reconfigure the park grounds
and use them for non-compatible recreational use, e.g., baseball,
soccer, etc.

The second external factor is another group similar to St. Louis 2004,
called \"Downtown NOW.\" They, too, are a local initiative but operate
under the direction of the Mayor of St. Louis. They seek to utilize the
park in a manner inconsistent with the park\'s legislative mandates,
e.g., they wish to add a restaurant, amphitheater, museum, and other
venues to the Arch grounds; and utilize the Arch grounds for festivals,
concerts, etc. Over the next few years, high-level political pressure
will be brought to bear on the park for such non-compatible use by both
St. Louis 2004 and Downtown NOW. The park has since been mandated by
Congress to work directly with this group and report back on the
progress in implementing the Downtown NOW Action Plan.

The third external issue already impacting the park, is the 2004-2006
commemoration of the Lewis and Clark Expedition Bicentennial. The
significance of the original Lewis and Clark Expedition played a
significant role in the development and westward expansion of the United
States during the 19th century. Several government agencies (local,
state, and Federal) have expressed interest in commemorating this
milestone in America\'s history. Since the major theme of the park is
westward expansion history, and this theme is largely predicated on the
Lewis and Clark Expedition, the park is taking a lead role in this
endeavor. The National Park Service\'s has proposed a major initiative
to work jointly with other state, local, and Federal government agencies
in the commemoration of this historic event. The park received a
one-time budget increase of \$80,000 in FY 2000 to fund the additional
costs associated with upcoming Lewis and Clark Bicentennial programming
and staff activities.

The fourth external issue impacting the park, is the threat of
terrorism. In FY 1997, the park was awarded one-time construction
funding of approximately \$ 1 million to plan, develop, and implement a
Counter-Terrorism Program. In addition, the park received a recurring
base increase of approximately \$500,000 to fund the staff necessary to
fully implement the Counter-Terrorism Program. Jefferson NEM was one of
only a few parks nationwide to secure funding for this type of program.
With those funds, the park set up and staffed magnetometers and x-ray
equipment to screen all visitors before permitting them to take the tram
ride to the observation deck at the top of the Arch, some 630 feet above
the ground. In addition, the park installed 25 CCTV cameras throughout
the park\'s 90-acre grounds on a fiber-optic network to monitor visitor
activity and provide surveillance capability around the clock. This CCTV
system was activated late in FY 1998 and is monitored in the park\'s
24-hour dispatch center located in the underground visitor center
facility beneath the Arch. The Arch is an international symbol, and the
FBI considers it an attractive \"target\" for terrorist or other
special-interest groups who might wish to make a statement by bombing it
or taking it over. With the events in the middle-East, Europe, Korea,
and Cuba erupting on nearly a daily basis, park management must be
increasingly concerned of such activity. As such, any long-term
decisions made regarding park operations, development, and visitor
services must factor-in the counter-terrorism element.

######### 

# [VII. SCHEDULE FOR IMPLEMENTATION]{.underline}

The GPRA law requires that Annual Performance Plans and Annual
Performance Reports be submitted to Congress at certain times. Under the
GPRA law, the Annual Performance Plan for each fiscal year needs to be
submitted just prior to the start of that fiscal year and the Annual
Performance Report (to assess and adjust a previous fiscal year\'s
performance) must be submitted 6 months after that fiscal year has
ended. The GPRA law creates a dilemma: the Annual Performance Report for
the fiscal year just ending does not have to be completed until 6 months
after the start of the year\'s Annual Performance Plan.

The National Park Service budget cycle for a fiscal year actually begins
nearly 2 years prior to the start of a particular fiscal year. A budget
call has to be made to the Field to allow the Washington Office time to
formulate a budget request which is then forwarded to the Interior
Department. After adjustments, the budget is provided to the Office of
Management and Budget where it is submitted to Congress by the President
about 9 months before the start of the fiscal year. Ideally, the budget
is then enacted just before a particular fiscal year begins.

Congress intends that the Strategic Plan, the Annual Performance Plan
and the Annual Performance Report will become measures they use to
assess the success of the National Park Service in executing its
missions they (and the people) want achieved. In order for the National
Park Service's performance measures to be of use in formulating budget
requests, and of use to Congress in deciding how much money to
appropriate to each park, a preliminary Annual Performance Plan is
needed for use in the budget formulation cycle nearly 2 years before a
fiscal year begins. The final Annual Performance Plan for that fiscal
year is then done just before the fiscal year begins, mainly for
internal use in managing the program for that year. A preliminary Annual
Performance Report has to be done just as a fiscal year ends so that it
can be used to adjust the Annual Performance Plan for the new fiscal
year. Then, a final Annual Performance Report is done and submitted to
Congress by March 31 of the following fiscal year.

The preliminary and final [Annual Performance Plans
(APP\'s)]{.underline} and [Annual Performance Reports
(APR\'s)]{.underline} need to be prepared according the following
schedule:

[Fiscal Year]{.underline} [Preliminary APP]{.underline} [Final
APP]{.underline} [Preliminary APR]{.underline} [Final APR]{.underline}

2001 04/00 09/00 08/00 03/01

2002 04/01 09/01 08/01 03/02

2003 04/02 09/02 08/02 03/03

2004 04/03 09/03 08/03 03/04

2005 04/04 09/04 08/04 03/05

######### 

#########  

######### VIII. CONSULTATION AND STRATEGIC PLAN PREPARERS

This plan was developed by the following staff members of Jefferson NEM:

Gary W. Easton, Superintendent, 314-655-1600

Kenneth G. Schaefer, Deputy Superintendent, 314-655-1600 (GPRA Contact)

Rose Hoots, Management Assistant, 314-655-1613 (GPRA Contact)

Franklin Mares, Chief, Museum Services and Interpretation

Kathryn Thomas, Curator

Robert Moore, Park Historian

David Bubac, Chief of Maintenance

Jim Jacobs, Grounds Supervisor

James Bissonette, Maintenance Mechanic Supervisor

John Paro, Administrative Officer

Verna Nunez, Budget Analyst

Rodney Danner, Chief, Ranger Activities

The 1997-2002 initial Five-Year Strategic Plan was sent for comment
directly to the offices and organizations shown below. This newly
revised 2001-2005 Five-Year Strategic Plan was not sent to them this
time because it essentially parrots the previous plan with updated long
term goals, and there was insufficient time within in which to seek
comment.

Mayor, City of St. Louis

Board of Aldermen, City of St. Louis

Chairman, Jefferson National Parks Association

Director, Missouri Department of Natural Resources

Executive Director, St. Louis Federal Executive Board

Director, St. Louis School Partnership Office

President & CEO, St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission

President & CEO, Downtown St. Louis, Inc.

Executive Director, Gateway Arch Park Expansion

President, St. Louis Regional Commerce & Growth Association

Deputy Executive Director/General Manager of Business Enterprises,
Bi-State Development Agency

**DOWNTOWN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI**

**REGIONAL MISSOURI AND ILLINOIS**