National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Interpretation and Education Program

Interpretation and

Education Program

Business Plan

Helping People Enjoy, Care About,

and Care for National Parks

$£%d

w9W. **» i

1^

41 Bw ^^^.

^P"; \i/,<^^L^^. I x^ i

EW&lifrV*** ®Bm

•%d*/i£\_^ ^3 jfm*''vJC^^B f ^.jgte^r A

. '^m

%.

-': .,W-;

^U]

bS^d^^

m

*m?*

mm
Interpretation and Education Program

Business Plan

Helping People Enjoy,. Care About,

and Care for National Parks

Produced by

National Park Service Education Council

Fall 2006

-U.S. Departmen^of Ww^njeri.br"

-Washington? DC ^2a' '

-.^.^s*:-

Glassy calm waters give way to a riotous roar at the

Brink of Upper Yellowstone Falls. Documentation

of the Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone by

photographer William Henry Jackson and painter Thomas Moran in 1871 helped lead to the

establishment of the national park, photo ©dan ng
Contents 9 - Kfc.-VS-T ? j 5 --. *

I,

Introduction 5

Director's Foreword 7

cecutive Summary 9

ogram Overview 11

tabling Legislation 12

ission Statements 1 

)04 NPS Inventory 12

National Park System Map 14

Historical Context 17

Fund Source Analysis 17

Adjusted ONPS Budget 18

Analysis of Real Growth 19

Visitation 23

Analysis of Expenditures 25

OFS Analysis 25

urrent Park Operations 29

Overview 29

Management and Administration 29

Leadership and Organizational

Effectiveness 29

Effective Training 29

valuation 31 banning 31 Management and Administration Summary Services Statement 32

Facilities 34

Visitor Centers, Contact Stations, Education Centers, Learning Centers 34

Museum Exhibits 35

Outdoor Exhibits and Interpretive Trails 35

Concessions Facilities 35

Facilities Summary Services Statement 35

Personal Services 36

Education Programs 36

Community Programs 36

Junior Ranger Programs 36

Personal Services Summary Services Statement 37

Interpretive Media and Technology 38

Publications 38

Audiovisual Media 38

Internet Publications 39

Interpretive Media and Technology

Summary Services Statement 39

Partnerships 40

Volunteers in Parks 40

Cooperating Associations 41

Friends Groups 42

Concessioners 42

Other Interpretation and Education

Partnerships 42

Partnerships Summary Services Statement 42

Interpretation and 21st-century Relevancy 43

Priorities and Strategies 45

Interpretation and Education Priorities 45

Specify Core Function 45

Inventory and Data 45

Leverage Partnership Relationships 46

Partners 46

Partner Credentialing 46

Volunteers in Parks 46

Training 46

Peer Review Certification 47

Evaluate l&E Effectiveness 47

Study NPS Audiences 48

Create l&E Technology Strategy 48

Upgrade Interpretive Media to Meet 21st- century Standards 48

Informed Leadership 48

Fund Interpretive Planning 49

Strategies for Increasing Non-Appropriated

Funding and Resources 49

Appendices 51

Director's Orders 51

l&E Business Plan Survey 52

Glossary 54

Acknowledgements 57
Hunting for Arches

The National Park Service is pleased to present you

with the opportunity to research individual arches by

location, name, size, finder, and many more interesting

facts! This program was produced in cooperation

with the Natural Arch and Bridge Society and Arches

National Park.

'tidy will be This database was made possible by

generous donation of information compiled by Doug Travers, one of the most dedicated arch hunters we know. He willingly gave the data and his programs to you, the visiting public, because of his enthusiasm for the

subject. Stone Canyon Media granted

permission to Doug and to the National Park Service to use their information. Look m the bookstore for a CD database you can take home.

The new visitor center at Arches National Park

features faux rock fins, interactive computer

programs, and a film developed in partnership with the National Park Foundation and Discovery Communications—all state of-the-art interpretive elements that help visitors enjoy educational and

meaningful park experiences. r;PS photo
Introduction Education is not thefilling of a pail, but the lighting of afire.

-William Butler Yeats

Interpretation & Education

Program Business Plan Objectives

1. Provide an overview of the

I&E Program and a synopsis

of itsfunding history.

2. Present a picture of current

I&E Program operations.

3. Identify I&E Program

priorities and strategies

and establish aframework

of investments that will

invigorate and strengthen

interpretation and education

programs Servicewide.

The purpose of business planning in the National Park Service is to improve the ability of parks, regional offices, and Servicewide

programs to communicate more clearly their financial status with principal stakeholders. A business plan answers these types of questions: What is the business of the program? How much

money does the program need to operate within appropriate

standards? What would be the best financial investments to improve the program in the future? This business plan articulates the National Park Service (NPS) responsibilities, operational

standards, and financial outlook for the national Interpretation

and Education (I&E) Program.

Similar to individual national park business plans, the intent of this document is to provide NPS managers and field staff, Department of Interior officials, members of Congress, park

partners, educators, and the public an insight into three main

program areas. First, it provides an overview of the I&E Program

and a synopsis of its funding history. Second, it presents a picture of the current I&E Program operations. Third, it identifies I&E

Program priorities and strategies and establishes a framework of investments that will invigorate and strengthen interpretation and

education programs Servicewide. This document is not an action

plan. The identified priorities and strategies provide initial steps

for investing in a larger vision. Analysis in this document is used

in the FY 2007-2008 Interpretation and Education Action Plan: Laying the Groundworkfor Change. The Action Plan specifies the

first steps required for attaining that vision and for maintaining

and strengthening NPS relevance in the twenty-first century.

This business plan represents the first time the agency has con- ducted a business-based examination of a national, Servicewide program. Addressing the broad scope of the program and recent developments in national NPS I&E activities proved challenging. For much of the history of NPS Interpretation, the national I&E

Program was implemented by park rangers. However, the numbers

and types of interpretive service providers in parks have greatly

expanded since 1980. The NPS I&E Program is now delivered by

park rangers, interpretive media, and volunteers and park part- ners such as field science institutes, museum operators, guide services, cooperating associations, contractors, and concessioners. This business plan focuses on park-based I&E Program activities.

Obtaining data to perform credible analysis based on business standards also proved challenging, since no systematic collection of program and media evaluation data occurs to assess outcomes

of the I&E Program nationally. Similarly, significant gaps exist

in the quantitative information collected annually. This business

plan provides immediate recommendations for improving

data collection, as well as a strategy for obtaining evaluation information to facilitate financial and program decision-making.

The National Park Service provides numerous opportunities

to engage learners outside the national parks. "Teaching with

Historic Places" uses properties listed on the NPS National

Register of Historic Places to help teachers bring historic places

into the classroom. The WebRangers Internet site involves students of all ages in NPS mission-based distance learning

activities. These newer programs and activities are essential parts of the NPS I&E Program, but are not included in the scope of this business plan because of insufficient data for a thorough analysis. As a comprehensive understanding of the Servicewide I&E

Program and relevant data evolves, a more complete analysis of park-based activities and other national programs will be critical.

Common methodology applied in developing individual national park business plans was adjusted to address the requirements of

a business plan for a Servicewide program. A diverse team of field practitioners, executive managers, and business plan consultants organized I&E Program activities into five functional areas (Management and Administration, Facilities, Personal Services,

Interpretive Media and Technology, and Partnerships.) These five areas describe all interpretation and education business for which

the NPS is responsible at the park level. In addition, a survey of all national park interpretive and education programs was conducted

in 2005 to obtain accurate data for the plan analyses (see Appendix

B). This information is referred to as "the survey." Metrics used in

this plan are developed from guidance derived from best program

practices, NPS policies, and directives related to education and

interpretation. As a result, this document not only communicates

the fiscal and operational resources and needs of park-based

interpretation and education Servicewide; it recommends targeted

investment priorities and strategies and provides operational

baseline knowledge for future decision-making.

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 5
With changing population,

demographics, and

technology, it is clear

that our approach to

interpretation and

education must also change

if we are to continue

engaging the American

public with their natural

and cultural heritage. —NPS Director Mary A. Bomar
Director's Foreword American democracy empowers us to build, transform, and renew our communities. Democracy enabled the establishment of our National Park System to preserve, unimpaired, the natural

gifts of this continent, places that enshrine our nation's enduring

principles, and places that remind us of the tremendous sacrifices Americans have made on behalf of those principles. Our national parks are every American's birthright and our nation's legacy for future generations. They are the most remarkable collection of

places in America for recreation and learning.

The Interpretation and Education Program is essential to the relevance of the National Park System in the twenty-first century,

and is a core function of the National Park Service. It is the means

by which we communicate key messages to the public about the NPS mission and legacy, ensuring that our national parks remain

vital and relevant in the hearts and minds of all Americans.

This business plan marks a milestone in the National Park Service

tradition of educational excellence that dates back to 1920. Since

that time, interpreters, naturalists, historians, and scientists have

developed creative and effective ways to help people experience

the rich learning environments of national parks. Through their

efforts, visitors can immerse themselves in places where events

actually happened, experience the thrill of connecting with real objects used by previous generations, and enjoy some of the most

beautiful and historic places in America.

During my National Park Service career, I have witnessed the excitement of discovery in the eyes of young visitors to our parks. Across our great nation, interpretive rangers provide interpreta- tion and education services for park visitors every day, while our

exhibits, films, publications, and electronic media invite everyone

to explore park stories and meanings. We work to provide bal- anced, accurate, and relevant information about the treasured

resources, objects, and places that are integral to our national

heritage with a dedication and spirit of stewardship that encourages emotional and intellectual connections to our national parks.

While the mission of the National Park Service remains the same, the way we go about achieving that mission has evolved

greatly as we near our centennial in 2016. As passionate

stewards of our natural and cultural heritage, it makes sense

to gather and look to the future—a new day that dawns for our Service and for education. The NPS Education Council

took on the challenge of Renewing Our Education Mission and I

was proud to be a part of that team. We addressed the challenges

and opportunities for interpretation and education in the twentyfirst century through sound, realistic, business practices. The

Education Council created a steering group to accomplish the

task and collaborated with the Student Conservation Association

to develop this report—a Business Planfor Interpretation and

Education.

We are proud of our work in the parks. We also recognize that demographic and technological trends are changing rapidly. We

want to achieve an appropriate balance between actual park

experiences and new technologies that might expand those

experiences. We want to make our visitor centers as informative and cost-effective as possible. We want our employees to have

the best training so they may provide excellent customer service and exceptional programs and activities. With assistance from

volunteers and partners who help deliver NPS interpretation

and education programs, we must better provide the public easy

access to a variety of enriching experiences.

To meet these challenges and maintain excellent programs, we must evaluate our programs and media, and base fiscal and programmaric decisions on accurate information about

techniques and services appropriate for our audiences. It is also

critical that we diversify our funding sources and further develop

a culture of philanthropy for our national parks. The priorities and

strategies described in this plan will enable us to embrace these changes and challenges, and make informed programming choices

using good business practices, to better serve all Americans.

This business plan uses data collected from throughout the NPS

on all aspects of the Servicewide Interpretation and Education

Program. We are proud of the last 85 years of interpretation

and education programming and the process of developing this plan has indicated where we might even do better. We intend to follow up and make those improvements. We are dedicated to the American people who love their parks and expect us to preserve them for their future enjoyment and learning. We can do no less. ^fU^^Ldfnae/Z

Mary A. Bomar, Director National Park Service
IP3

- v •

v- h

¥ pa

s_j

fa,-

fr^L- , — ^%j

,

Interpreters dressedj£^er{6a"cl6thing, offer living js-thafcaptivate'tfie attention

of studcntSjand teachers at San^ATitonio Missions

-NationaLHistorical PartCNi'S Kioto

\
Executive Summary The world is but a canvas to the imagination. —Henry David Thoreau

This Interpretation and Education Business Plan presents data and analysis, describes challenges, successes, and shortfalls, articulates existing standards, and provides strategies and

priorities that should be used for future decision-making and

subsequent actions. The FY 2007-2008 Interpretation and

Education Action Plan: Laying the Groundworkfor Change is grounded in the findings presented in this document and should

be read as an extension of the information presented here.

This business plan is primarily a Servicewide survey of parkbased personal service interpretation and education programs. This is because little reliable data exists comprehensively

describing interpretive media, the tremendous contributions of volunteers, concessions, and other partners, or other office and program-based efforts such as "Teaching With Historic Places" or the WebRangers Internet site. This plan identifies the need to gather and integrate such data. The data and analysis

presented here is mostly derived from Fiscal Years 1999-2004

and is intended to both establish a baseline reference as well as provide a starting point for revising future data gathering. This

plan also recognizes the historic role of Harpers Ferry Center as the keeper of interpretive media standards and production values.

It is critical that the strategies and priorities presented here are considered and, where appropriate, are integrated with similar data and analysis of interpretive media and other interpretation

and education efforts.

This plan identifies shortfalls affecting interpretation and

education. Between Fiscal Years 1999 and 2004, the cost of employing a Full Time Equivalent (FTE) interpretation and

education position rose 19.8 percent. This increased FTE

cost, over the same period, outpaced the inflation-adjusted

Operation of the National Park Service (ONPS) budget growth

of 16.9 percent. Between FY 1999 and FY 2004 the I&E

Program, experienced a loss of 205 FTE Servicewide. Much

of this reduction occurred through the loss of temporary and

seasonal positions, affecting public access to interpretation

and education rangers at peak seasons. While permanent and

temporary positions were reduced, lower graded public contact

positions increased. Many interpreters, educators, managers, and

leaders are concerned the professional standards and expertise of ranger interpreters and educators are being threatened. This

business plan recognizes that professional ranger interpreters

and educators are important to the ongoing success of the

Interpretation and Education Program and the agency's ability to provide for visitor enjoyment.

Five functional areas are described in Current Park Operations

(seepage 29): Management and Administration, Facilities, Personal

Services, Interpretive Media and Technology, and Partnerships.

Each functional area presents appropriate interpretation and

education activities, challenges, and standards. All articulated standards were identified from policies, Director's Orders, and

Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) goals. A 2005

park survey was used to conduct a gap analysis indicating the Servicewide proficiency in meeting those standards. The results of

that analysis are presented—most often as a shortfall.

Finally, this plan offers a series of priorities and strategies as next

best steps to create better value for the public and parks through

wise investment. These recommendations can help create greater

efficiencies and effectiveness in the Servicewide Interpretation

and Education Program:

Create I&E core function statements and operating standards. Commit to staffing levels that support core function and

operating standards. Develop a more effective and comprehensive inventory of I&E

practitioners and data collection system.

Leverage partnership relationships.

Add Volunteer Coordinators. Create a distance learning platform.

Simplify the Peer Review Certification Program and require

certification of NPS employees.

Evaluate I&E Program Effectiveness. Study National Park Service audiences. Create I&E Technology Strategy. Upgrade interpretive media.

Sustain and enhance an informed leadership.

Fund interpretive planning.

Embrace efforts to create a culture of philanthropy.

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 9
Interactive exhibits at Everglades National Park provide opportunities for discovery as well as orientation and safety information. NPS photo

»<",'

X

***.

:-.

*+<*. .w:

&

-#<>

-*«

;\ 'as

g

_*» *y< •

m W # * • •

_ -_=- =s^ ste i^p

*•!

I*'

he

i » >• * •

-—•A. %3^.

1
Program Overview NPS has a solid history ofserving visitors. This is demonstrated with consistently high

visitor satisfaction ratings, such as 95 percent of visitors reporting a good or very good

experience last year. —2005 Office of Management and Budget Program Assessment Rating Tool

Visitor survey data consistently

show that the public values the

presence of uniformed park

rangers when they visit their

national parks.

Interpretation and Education services became core to the National Park Service mission when Director Stephen T. Mather asked Dr. Loye Holmes Miller to offer a "Nature Guide

Service" in Yosemite National Park in 1920. In FY 2004, 3,924

permanent and seasonal interpreters provided 604,928 program

opportunities to 148,304,519 visitors. Interpretive park rangers, with their in-depth subject matter knowledge, their understanding

of park-specific audiences, and their captivating ability to communicate, are able to respond quickly and appropriately to the changing interests, understandings, and demands of the U.S. citizenry and international visitors. Rangers also collaborate with

professional educators, school systems, and other organizations

to develop and present programs that support curriculum and

learning objectives. Interpretation and education achieves the NPS mission through the trust the public confers on park rangers. National parks represent a multitude of complex topics, stories, and perspectives. As a servant of democracy, the National Park

Service provides the public with understanding and appreciation of park themes and subjects.

Nonpersonal media, publications, films, exhibits, signs, and

websites also provide visitors access to understanding and

appreciation. More than half of park visitors use a variety of nonpersonal interpretive media to enhance their park experience.

Interpretive media products are integral to I&E as they provide

constant service, appeal to multiple learning styles, and allow

for individual privacy and choice. New wireless technology can

provide interpretation to previously underrepresented audiences

(youth) on their own personal devices. Media such as park and

trail brochures receive the highest importance rating of any

interpretive service. All parks use and depend on interpretive

media to present interpretation and orientation and enhance the experiences of park visitors.

Partner groups share a trust in the knowledge, authority, quality,

and fairness of National Park Service educational programming.

Interpretation and education services embrace partnerships with

school systems, scouting groups, religious communities, and other

learning institutions that desire in-park learning experiences. Place-based learning serves both the curricula established by partners and the mission of the National Park Service by

connecting learners to parks.

The I&E Program is also greatly enhanced by volunteers and partners. In fact, visitors are more likely to interact with

volunteers and partners than park rangers. Significant potential

exists to increase I&E effectiveness by investing in such

relationships. However, limited data are available describing the scope of non-employee contributions. Further, the standards and

training required of NPS employees are inconsistently applied

to non-employees. The park ranger is a compelling and trusted symbol. Visitor survey data consistently show that the public values the presence of uniformed park rangers when they visit their national parks. As the owners of these public properties,

Americans expect them to be managed by public employees on

their behalf. In 2004, 72% of 14,913 visitors surveyed at 309 parks

rated interpretive ranger "very good" and 23% rated them as "good." The quality of I&E services presented to the public—and

the image and reputation of the National Park Service—is directly related to the skills, training, and professionalism of the people

who provide the service. As valuable as park rangers are, the

responsibility of helping visitors care about and care for parks cannot be theirs alone. The I&E Program could be much stronger

with a more integrated strategy that ensured standards and

coordinated the work of park rangers, volunteers, partners, and

others. Much of I&E achievement depends on national, regional,

and park leadership. Success is most apparent when leaders at all levels address the following areas:

• Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness—Are competency

based training, best financial and outreach practices, and goal driven planning embraced?

• Personal Services—Do employees enable and encourage

volunteers and partners to meet professional standards?

• Audiences—How can we reach out to potential constituencies?

• Evaluation—How well are we doing with what kinds of

audiences, and how can we do better?

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 11
National Park Service

Mission Statement

The National Park Service

preserves unimpaired the natural

and cultural resources and

intrinsic values of the National

Park Systemfor the enjoyment,

education, and inspiration of

this andfuture generations. The

National Park Service cooperates

with partners to extend the

benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation, and

outdoor recreation throughout

this country and the world.

• Partners—How can we expand our capacity in a mutually

beneficial way?

• Media—Are they relevant, effective, accurate, compelling,

current, and accessible?

National Park Service interpretive services are place-based,

learner-centered, and accessible; they are grounded in sound

scholarship, content methods, and audience analysis, and

they incorporate ongoing evaluation for continual program

improvement and effectiveness. Visitor understanding and

appreciation {Connecting People to Parks, 1998) reflect quality

experiences, from enjoying the park and its resources to understanding why the park exists and recognizing the

significance of its resources. If visitors value parks and their resources, they will help ensure that parks and their resources will be available for the enjoyment of future generations.

Interpretation and education has been offered to the public for 85

years. Interpreters and media facilitate the public's understanding

of their parks through first-hand knowledge, helping them to care about these special places so that they will care for them.

Americans visit theme parks as tourists. They visit national parks

as owners and stewards.

Enabling Legislation

Authority for NPS interpretive and educational programs is contained in the Organic Act; the 1935 Historic Sites, Buildings,

and Antiquities Act (16 USC 462(j)); the National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969 (42 USC 4332(G)); and the National Parks Omnibus Management Act of 1998 (16 USC 5911). The Organic

Act of 1916 created the National Park Service with the purpose

to conserve park resources and "provide for the enjoyment of

the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them

unimpaired for future generations." Interpretation and education

fulfills this purpose by helping the public understand the meaning

and relevance of park resources and fostering stewardship

development. The Office of Management and Budget states that

Visitor Services, including interpretation and education, is what

the National Park Service does best. No other federal, state, or

local agency has a similar mission for resources deemed nationally

significant by law or proclamation.

Interpretation and Education Program

Mission Statement

The purpose of interpretation and education in the National Park Service is to provide memorable, meaningful, and

inspirational experiences related to the parks and strengthen

public understanding of the full meaning and relevance of

the nation's natural and cultural resources. Interpretation and

education programs provide enjoyable learning and recreational opportunities for the public on lands that have been "dedicated

and set apart as a public park or pleasuring ground for the

benefit and enjoyment of the people" by United States law, and

to "conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and

wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired

for future generations." Enjoyment and understanding of park resources and values by Americans is fundamental to the stewardship of the National Park System.

2004 National Park Service Inventory

Visitation 276,908,333 visitors 144,764,976 visitor contacts through interpretive staff or media

3,586,705 contacts through formal education programs

Facilities 12,225 wayside exhibits 888 operating visitor centers

Personnel and Partnerships

2,025 permanent FTE interpretive staff 1899 Temporary FTE interpretive staff 1,950,000 hours of volunteer interpretation services $26,098,000 support provided by cooperating associations 64 cooperating associations providing interpretive services

Resources 293 official park guides and maps

51,440 education programs offered by NPS staff 472,570 formal interpretation programs served 13,501,304 visitors 8,791 audiovisual interpretive media (films and video)

12 National Park Service
^-3*:

Giantess geyser vents steam at the Old Faithful soldier station in Yellowstone.. Historic photos such

as this 1902 image from the Detroit Photographic

Company are available free to the public on the Yellowstone National Park website. NPS COLLECTION
National Park System

&

*

4

San Juan "sland^North . Ross_Lake__ j

100 200 Kilometers

I

North ©

• Yosemite National Park Service unit

• OregonTrail Associated sites

Olympic*

Fort Clatsop* ,

.Lake Chelan

Ebey's Landing

'Klondike Gold Rush" Lake R

9j WASHINGTON *

Mount Rainier

Fort Vancouver Whitman Mission

Cape Krusenstern*

Bering Land Bridge

V

Kobuk Valley

ALASKA

N?-^

Gates of the Arctic

/

A John Day Fossil Beds*

'=*=£^

^

Yukon-Charley Rivers*

Point Reyesi

SAN FRANCISCO AREA

Eugene O'Neill Fort Point John Muir Golden Gate

Muir Woods

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front San Francisco Maritime

Wrangell-St. Elias # Channel Islands

Kenai Fjords

OREGON

.Crater Lake Oregon Trail*

. Oregon Caves John D. Ro

J

Craters of the I Lava Beds* . I

Whiskeytown-Shasta-Trinity

*Lassen Volcanic ,.,,,,; 'California Trail

g

Timpaj NEVADA

Great Basin* I Yosemite* \

Devils Postpile Pinnacles Kings Canyon*, .Manzanar Cedar Break •Death Valley Zio^

Pipe Sprin; Lake Mead. i \ Grand Cart Mojave. \ j Sunset Crater VI 'Santa Monica Mountains

V Tuzigo Montezuma Ca

Sequoia CALIFORNIA

Joshua Tree

Cabrillo*i

•Juan Bautista art

deAma Trail

Organ Pipe CactusTumac

HAWAII

USS Arizona Memorial .Kalaupapa

* Haleakala Puukohola Heiau* Kalako-Honokohau • Pu'uhonua o Honaunau *

United States Territories

AMERICAN SAMOA

National Park of American Samoa

Hawaii Volcanoes

GUAM

War in the Pacific

PUERTO RICO VIRGIN ISLANDS

SanJuan

. Virgin Islands

"•Virgin Islands Coral Re

Salt River Bay»/ Buck lsland Reef

Christiansted

14 National Park Service
Glacier

MONTANA

.Grant-Kohrs Ranch

Big Hole

.Fort Union Trading Post NORTH DAKOTA

Theodore Roosevelt*

Knife River Indian Vill MINNESOTA

Apostle .Keweenaw

Jslands

.Little Bighorn Battle 'Bighorn Canyon

• Lewis and Clark Trail

r., Parkway

'Grand Teton Ofis Tower S0UTHDAK( lTA

Mount Rushmore. Minuteman Missile Jewel Cave* . •* WYOMING WindC8ve Badlands

Niobrara

'Agate Fossil Beds

'Scotts BluffNEBRASKA

o?

Sleeping Bear Dunes

•North Country Trail Theodore Roosevelt Inaugural MICHIGAN ,J

in Trail 'Saint Croix Island

aint-Gaudens*

'Acadia

, BOSTON AREA

.Marsh-Billings-/ Adams

Rockefeller ' Boston African American

Boston Harbor Islands Boston

Saratoga Lowell, /cape Frederick Law Olmsted

Fort Stanwix* „ „* Blackstone • Cod John Fitzgerald Kennedy

Martin Rjver Valley • Longfellow Women's Rights* Van B^

e

rn * liBk, * •,.""' Minute Man

p » 9ITM Roaer New Salem Maritime Upper Delaware. ArJ^°^ii!iams Bedford Saugus Iron Works

Steamtown. WeirFarmT"- __Whaling

Missouri

Homestead

Colorau.

.

Arches. * Black Canyon

tsef of

«.he

.Gunnison

"Florissant Fossil Beds

* *Canyonlands Curecanti N3,UrJolfnwlIp .Bent's Old Fort

'Great Sand Dunes

.lovenweep

• Yucca House

,ow* Canyon '.MesaVerde

Jge •., —T~——- Nava o '^ec Ruins jdeChelly. #Chaco Culture Wupatki , Hubben Tradlng post Bandelier* Fort Union

'alnut Canyon El Morro *Pecos

'etrified *

. *Petroglyph Anbates Flint Forest El Malpais uarries .Salinas Pueblo Missions

ronto NEW MEXICO

.Nicodemus Brown v. Board • \NSAS of Education

Tallgrass Prairie.

Fort Larned

Fort Scott *

• Santa Fe Trail

Pony Express

'Trail Lincoln Home'

*Capulin Volcano

I

I I rtHOMA

Lake

Meredith Washita Battlefield

Trail of Tears Trail *

Harry S Truman

1 Jefferson National Expansion Memorial • Ulysses S. Grant MISSOURI

Wilson's .Creek

Middle Delaware* E

Delaware Water Gap' .•/"" *Fire Island Perry's Victory. ii__L. « r-orfioM Morristown Pf James A. Garfield Hopewell r , A 'J I Cuyahoga Valley • Furnace . ^ A ' Fdoar Allan Poe

Allegheny Po'rtage Railroad. Valley Forge* ^fnTDendence Johnstown F.ood*.F,i 9ht ^.Gettysburg ^aX'sTolciuszko

-' H <-' Fort Necessity. Eisenhower Hampton ^^ \ Friendship HiH* ^

' " ForTMcHenry

Dayton Aviation Heritage . TM1" ^dar tffi^k and

Hopewell Culture* Shenandoah. Belle Grove^\ .Assateague Island William Howard Taft • Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania •

Cape Hatteras

a Grande

is Gila Cliff Dwellings

Fort Bowie * White Sands

"Chiricahua .Carlsbad Caverns - J Chamizal Guadalupe Mountains

v

.Fort Davis

.Rio Grande

•Amistad

Big Bend

George Rogers Clark Gautey River* . R

!?,hmond

* * , , NewRiverGorge'. »«*»* i-?«>»"\p&t25$i •Lincoln Boyhood Bluestone V A Appomattox

. Booker T. Washington* Court House Wright Brothers Abraham Lincoln Birthplace K p N j UCKY/ Blue Ridge Parkway iFort Raleigh Ozark Mammoth Cave* Big South Fork * .Guilford Courthouse *" 'Cumberland Gap NORTH V

George Washington Carver _^Donelson .Obed G^s^ky^uTains CAROLINATeaRidqe / ' •£,„„„ Ri„-r • »Overmountain Victory Trail

Fort *La,o ;INi;L St *°aTsKUrg Home* c< -Kjn9S Mountain .^

.Smith ARKANSAS Shiloh. Russell Cave, .^kan^auga^ SOUTH \ >

Little Rock Central Brices Little River Ninety Six* OAh.V^r'Ii;L

H,gh School . cross Roads * Canyon * .CnaSoochee River00"93 "*

- ' Tupelo Kennesaw Mountain 'Martin Luther King, Jr. Arkansas Post

Poverty Point

Jean Lafitte*

< — »Charles Pinckney 'llSSISSIPffl Horseshoe \ GEORGIA \ ,/ * „ Bend \ il V ,^ v Fort Sumter

Natchez Trace Parkway. Selma to * Ocmulgee

Natchez Trace Trail. Momgomery

# TuskegeeJnsttata ^ XortPulask| fvicksburg

" Airman'" 'j^my Carter

.Fort Frederica .Cane River Creole I ALABAMA .Cumberland Island 'Natchez ___ -jTyimucuan

Fort Caroline CastMlo de San Marcos LOUISIANA K.^SQJXr* 'FortMatanzas New Orleans Jazz. *^Gulf Islands .Canaveral

Palo Alto Battlefield •

DeSoto" FLORIDA"

Big Cypress.

Everglades.

. >

Dry Tortugas*

.Biscayne

Eleanor Roosevelt Home of Franklin D. Roosevelt

Vanderbilt Mansion

- NEW YORK CITY AREA

African Burial Ground

Castle Clinton Federal Hall Gateway (also N.J.) General Grant Governors Island Hamilton Grange Sagamore Hill Saint Paul's Church

Statue of Liberty Theodore Roosevelt Birthplace

-WASHINGTON, D.C. AREA

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Carter G. Woodson Home

Constitution Gardens

Ford's Theatre

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial

Frederick Douglass Korean War Veterans Memorial

Lincoln Memorial Lyndon Baines Johnson

Memorial Grove Mary McLeod Bethune

Council House

National Mall National World War II Memorial

Pennsylvania Avenue Rock Creek Theodore Roosevelt Island Thomas Jefferson Memorial Vietnam Veterans Memorial Washington Monument

White House MARYLAND

Antietam

Catoctin Mountain Chesapeake and Ohio Canal

(also D.C, W.Va.) Clara Barton

Fort Washington

Greenbelt Monocacy

Piscataway Potomac Heritage Trail (also Pa.. Va.. D.C.) Thomas Stone

VIRGINIA

Arlington House

George Washington Birthplace George Washington Memorial Parkway (also Md.) Manassas

Prince William Forest Wolf Trap

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 15
-•V^;.:>

for preservation at the United Nations World K Environment Day in 2005. t\iPS PHOTO

/ .

' • %£

V'-sT•••>.;

*%* P '

. - . » v - «. i

'-.:>" -.
Historical Context

This plan primarily presents data

from Fiscal Years 1999-2004 to

establish a baseline forfuture

comparison and actions.

Fund Source Analysis

This plan primarily presents data from Fiscal Years 1999-2004 to establish a baseline for future comparison and actions. The

FY 2007-2008 Interpretation and Education Action Plan: Laying

the Groundwork for Change and other subsequent documents

will provide an occasion to update data and address current fiscal constraints and opportunities

Annual funding by fiscal year (FY) for Interpretation and

Education (I&E) is divided into three categories: Operation of

the National Park System (ONPS) Base Funds, Recreation Fee Demonstration Funds, and Reimbursable Funds. Over the past six years, total expenditures from these fund sources have fluctuated between $124.7 million to $151.4 million. In FY 2004 funding was approximately $146.6 million. Interpretation and Education

ONPS funds increased steadily over the past five years.

ONPS Funds

Operation of the National Park System Funds are congressionally

appropriated each year, are often impacted by external national

events, and include base and non-base funds. Base funds, the

largest portion of the ONPS budget, support basic I&E Program

operations. Non-base funds support one-time projects and

constitute a modest portion of the ONPS budget. Parks compete

for such funds annually. ONPS base expenditures for I&E pay

for salaries, benefits, training for I&E personnel, and materials and supplies for I&E activities. For the past six fiscal years, ONPS

funds have represented 91% of all I&E expenditures.

Recreation Fee Demonstration Funds

The Recreational Fee Demonstration Program (Fee Demo)

was first authorized in 1996 and allows parks to retain 80% of entrance and service fees, with the remaining 20% distributed to parks on a competitive basis. Expenditure of Fee Demo funds is less flexible than expenditure of ONPS funds, since according

to federal law, such funds must be spent on bricks and mortar

types of repair or rehabilitation projects and on programs that

relate directly to visitor enjoyment, visitor access, and visitor health and safety. With a few exceptions, NPS policy further limits expenditure for personnel costs to non-permanent employees.

Despite these limitations, Fee Demo funding is often used to finance special projects difficult to fund through ONPS dollars, such as interpretive media. Over the past six fiscal years, Fee Demo expenditures have grown slightly, from 5% to 6% of I&E

expenditures. Successor legislation, the Federal Lands Recreation

Enhancement Act (FLREA), provides new authorities that have

the potential to increase funding of I&E projects. However, NPS

policy will continue to avoid use of fee revenues for operational needs.

Interpretation and Education Expenditures by Fund Source: FY 1999-2004

$160,000,000

$140,000,000

$120,000,000

$100,000,000

$80,000,000

$60,000,000 -

$40,000,000

$20,000,000

$0

Reimbursable (16 USC 1a-2g) Funds

Fee Demonstration Funds

ONPS Base Funds

FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 17
The $158.1 million FY2004

Interpretation & Education

budget had the equivalent purchasing power of $120.9 million

in FY1993 dollars.

Reimbursable Funds

These funds include all money earned through fees charged to provide interpretive services under the 16 USC la-2 g authority

(August 1970). Over the past six fiscal years, these funds have

represented the smallest portion of I&E expenditures, with a decline in dollar amount from $5.1 million (4.1%) to 3.7 million

(3.7%). Although Reimbursable Funds represent a small portion

of the I&E budget, they are important for funding park I&E

programs. If parks choose to charge for specialized services, these funds might represent opportunity for program growth.

Adjusted ONPS Budget

Operation of the National Park System (ONPS) dollars are the primary fund source for the I&E program. These funds cover primary I&E operational costs as well as one-time investment

costs. Figures reported by the NPS Budget Office indicate that ONPS appropriations grew approximately 5% annually from 1993

to 2004, increasing from $92.9 million to $158.1 million. After

adjusting for inflation, the appropriated budget still demonstrated

annual growth, but at a more modest rate of 2.4 %. Therefore, the

$158.1 million FY 2004 I&E budget had the equivalent purchasing

power of $120.9 million in FY 1993 dollars. During this same

period, the NPS experienced a net increase of 21 park units, with

the largest increases occurring in 1995 to 1996 and 2001 to 2002.

As reflected in the accompanying graph, real (adjusted for infla- tion) ONPS funding for I&E increased in all years, except from

FY 1995 to FY 1996 when funding decreased by 1.9%, and

between FY 2003 and FY 2004, when it decreased by 2.3%. This

shows that during those two periods, inflation outpaced the ONPS funding increase. Annual increases in the ONPS budget for Interpretation and Education have primarily been used to cover

increases in the costs of salaries and benefits. Drivers for these

additional costs include the rising number of staff covered by the

costlier Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), and the implementation of the Ranger Careers Program in 1994, which

established the journey level for field rangers at the GS-9 level.

Discrepancy Between Total ONPS Adjustments and Total Interpretation & Education Expenditures

The annual I&E ONPS budgets reported by the NPS Budget

Office are considerably greater than the annual I&E ONPS

expenditures cited in the Servicewide Interpretive Report

(SIR.) The difference between these figures averaged $19

million between FY 1999 and FY 2004. The reason for these discrepancies include the following: (1) The I&E ONPS budget

includes appropriations to support staff and support costs for the Washington Office, Harpers Ferry Center, and regional offices, and expenditures for these offices are not reported in the SIR; and

(2) The SIR reports only ONPS base expenditures, while the NPS

Budget Office appropriations reports include non-base funds.

ONPS Historical Funding: Interpretation and Education

5160,000,000

$140,000,000

$120,000,000

$100,000,000

$80,000,000

$60,000,000

$40,000,000

$20,000,000

$0

Real Dollars Enacted (ONPS)

CPI Adjusted Enactments

(1993 Dollars)

FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04

18 National Park Service
Valued at $17.19 an hour, l&E volunteer time in FY 2004 was worth a total gross value of $33.9

million. Interpretation and education volunteer- provided services represented an additional 949

FTE of park labor, or a 38% increase over the total 2,485 staff FTEs. NP5 PHOTO

Analysis of Real Growth

The table below analyzes appropriated base funding growth in further detail, indicating the increase in labor costs since 1999. The National Park Service measures staff hours in terms of Full Time Equivalents (FTE). One FTE represents 2,080 annual work

hours. In FY 2004, after adjusting for inflation, it cost 19.8% more to employ the 1999 level of FTE ($6,286 more per FTE).

The number of filled I&E FTE has decreased because staffing has become more expensive.

Increased Cost per FTE of Existing Staff The first section of the table refers to the 2,690 I&E staff employed Servicewide as of FY 1999. After adjusting for inflation, the cost associated with these staff members increased by $16.9

million between FY 1999 and FY 2004, with the average cost per FTE increased by approximately $6,286, including both salary and

benefits. This growth in salaries and benefits is due primarily to the transition to the Federal Employees Retirement System, pay

grade increases, federally mandated cost of living allowances, and

the rising cost of health insurance. The older retirement system,

CSRS, essentially excluded retirement costs from the agency per- sonnel cost equation, while FERS covers the true costs of staffing.

Reduction of FTE The second section of the table refers to the reduction in I&E staff Servicewide since FY 1999. To maintain FY 1999 FTE levels in

FY 2004, I&E needed to expend approximately $102.3 million in labor costs; however, only $94.5 million dollars were expended.

Due to the increase in labor costs and the decrease in labor expenditures, I&E staff have been reduced by 205 FTE—59 full time and 146 temporary positions. This shows how the increased FTE costs outpaced the inflation-adjusted ONPS budget

growth of 16.9%. Over the same time period of I&E FTE loss, Servicewide FTE increased by 624 FTE.

Of the 205 I&E FTE lost, the decrease occurred in four regions—Alaska, Intermountain, National Capital, and Northeast. The Midwest, Pacific West, and Southeast Regions actually

experienced slight increases in I&E FTE levels between 1999 and

2004. (See graph onfollowing page.)

Reduction of Non-Labor Expenditures

The third section of the table refers to all non-labor expenditures

including supplies, materials, equipment, and other items. Nonlabor expenditures have decreased by approximately $4 million

in real purchasing power since FY 1999. This is a 9% reduction in ONPS non-labor expenditures during this time period, primarily

a result of the increased cost of supplies and materials and the increased percentage of ONPS funding dedicated to more costly

labor.

Operational Costs: ONPS Base Funding

FY 1999 ACTUAL COSTS

FY 1999 INFLATION ADJUSTED TO FY 2004FY 2004 ACTUAL COSTS NET COST

INCREASE

FTE Average Total Average Total Average Total Average Total

FY 1999 STAFF

Cost of Labor

(Salary and Benefits)

2,690

$ 27,991 $ 75,297,000 $ 31,738 $ 85,375,220 $ 38,024 $102,284,560 $ 6,286 $ 16,909,340

STAFF REDUCTION

Reduced FTE Impact

(205) 38,024 (7,794,920) 38,024 (7,794,920)

TOTAL LABOR 2,485 75,297,000 85,375,200 94,489,640 9,114,420

NON-LABOR 37,199,938 42,179,200 38,346,678 (3,832,522)

TOTAL $112,496,938 $127,554,400 $132,836,318 $ 5,281,898

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 19
This reduction of205 FTE shows

how the increased FTE costs outpaced the inflation-adjusted

ONPS budget growth of16.9

percent.

Regional FTE Change: 1999 to 2004 Change in FTE

20

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100 Alaska Intermountain Midwest National Capital Northeast Pacific West Southeast

20 National Park Service
Additional Staffing Considerations

Examining the reduction of both permanent and temporary

positions offers further understanding of I&E's 205 FTE decrease and its impact on park visitors. (See graph below. Data is not

availablefor FY 2000.) Compared to FY 1999, 75 fewer permanent

I&E staff were employed (2,100 to 2025 permanents) in FY 2004. Over the same period, there were 426 fewer temporary I&E

positions (2,324 to 1,898). While both permanent and temporary

positions declined, anecdotal evidence suggests that some

parks replaced more costly permanent positions with less costly

temporary positions, masking an even greater reduction in the temporary category. Temporary I&E staff are usually employed

to maximize the availability of personal services during peak

visitation. It is likely that most of the loss of 205 FTE directly affected service to the public.

The loss of permanent positions, as well as the potential practice of substituting temporary employees for permanent ones,

threatens the expertise and professional standards of the ranger

interpreter and educator. This concern might be amplified

by a comparison of the decrease of park ranger positions to the increase of lower graded park guides. Consideration of

interpretive staffing levels measured each June from 1999 to 2004

reveals that park ranger positions, permanent and temporary,

decreased by 427 (1830 in June 1999 to 1403 in June 2004).

Using the same measurements over the same period, park guide

positions rose by 309 (468 in June 1999 to 777 in June 2004).

(See graph onfollowing page.)

It is possible that many of the guide positions are being created under more disciplined position management correcting what

might be considered the over-classification of some positions

during the Ranger Careers program. These are trend figures that do not account for inconsistencies in reporting or count all public contact positions, yet they seem to further describe the general

diminution of the professional I&E ranger.

Permanent and Temporary Interpreter Positions: 1999 to 2004 Permanent Employees Temporary Employees

2500

1999 2001 2002 2003 2004

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 21
The loss ofpermanent positions, as well as the potential practice of

substituting temporary employees

for permanent ones, threatens the

expertise and professional standards of the ranger interpreter

and educator.

Interpreter and Guide Positions: June Quarters 1999 to 2004 Interpreters Guides

2000

1999 ?000 2001 2002 2003 2004

22 National Park Service
2004 NPS Regional Visitation

Alaska Intermountain Midwest

National Capital Northeast

Pacific West

Southeast

Visitation

Since 1916 the National Park System has grown in both size and popularity, with the number of annual recreation visitors now approaching 280 million. Visits to national parks can be

significantly affected by national events, changes in policies,

changes in the economy, fuel prices, foreign exchange rates, cultural changes, increases in alternative recreation services, and

the occurrence of natural disasters such as hurricanes, floods,

and wildfires. For this reason, it is not unusual to experience

fluctuations in visitation patterns. In 2004 the National Park

Service hosted approximately 277 million recreational visitors to 388 national parks, many of whom were repeat visitors; this is a

slight decrease from the 287 million visitors in 1999. Recreational

visitation has remained almost constant for the last 16 years. The

Public Use Statistics Office predicts a decrease in 2005 visitation to 272,258,640 and to 270,126,688 in 2006.

Despite fluctuations in Servicewide visitation, the proportion of

regional visits has remained about the same. The Southeast Region

experiences the largest percentage of overall visitation, with 24%,

or 63,454,694 visits in 2004. Pacific West receives the second

largest percentage of visitors (20%), followed by Northeast (18%),

National Capital (16%), Intermountain (14%), Midwest (7%),

and Alaska (1%). The graph on the following page indicates the change in I&E visitor contacts between 1999 and 2004 by region.

The green bars indicate change in visitation. With the exception of

the National Capital and Alaska Regions, visitation has decreased

slightly since 1999. The brown bars indicate change in the number

of I&E visitor contacts. This change varies widely according to

region. Regional and park circumstances, budgets, and leadership

may help explain regional differences and fluctuations in I&E

visitor contacts. For example, National Capital Region's reduction

of visitor contacts should be viewed with the understanding that the region includes far fewer parks, relative to the other regions,

and that some features such as the Washington Monument were

closed for much of this period. However, the Northeast Region

experienced fewer visitors, but increased visitor contacts within

the context of reducing I&E FTE.

Visitor Demographics

The National Park Service 1997 strategic plan states that "parks

have historically been used mainly by the white middle class segment of the population and many parks do not attract and

offer park experiences meaningful to visitors from varied ethnic backgrounds." Current visitor use statistics support this claim. Park managers recognize this issue and have been experimenting

with ways to attract underserved audiences, but success is slow. Barriers include difficulty in recruiting and retaining ethnically diverse staff, especially with reduced fiscal resources.

NPS Visitation: 1979 to 2004

310,000,000

290,000,000

270,000,000

250,000,000

230,000,000

210,000,000

190,000,000

170,000,000

150,000,000

Recreational Visits

1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 23
Current visitor use statistics

support the claim that parks have

historically been used mainly by

the white middle class segment

of the population and many

parks do not attract and offer

park experiences meaningful

to visitorsfrom varied ethnic

backgrounds.

Regional Visitation and Visitor Contact Change: 1999-2004 I Change in Visitation Change in Contacts

100,000,000

500,000

-500,000,000

100,000,000

-150,000,000

-200,000,000

-250,000,000

-300,000,000 Alaska Intermountain Midwest National Capital Northeast Pacific West Southeast

24 National Park Service
Analysis of Expenditures Operations Formula System Analysis

The graph below shows all Interpretation and Education Program

expenditures by categories for the past six fiscal years (FY 2000 is omitted due to a loss in data). The figures represent all expended

ONPS funds dedicated to interpretation, as well as other funding

sources. Alternate fund sources may include Volunteers in Parks

(VIP) funds, fee monies, donations, and grants.

Over the past six fiscal years, the percentage of expenditures by

category has remained relatively constant. The greatest amount

of funds are expended on visitor centers and contact stations

averaging 39% of total funds expended annually. The next largest

categories of expenditures are formal interpretation (planned

and scheduled in advance) and informal interpretation services (spontaneous encounters between interpreters and visitors) at 17% and 11%, respectively.

Education programs show the fourth largest expenditure at 10%,

followed by special events (6%), park-produced publications

(4%), interpretive demonstrations (4%), audiovisual programs

(3%), community programs (2%), websites (2%), and loan

materials (<1%).

The Operations Formula System (OFS), managed through the NPS Budget Office, is a web-based budget tool designed to assist parks, regions, and the Washington Office with identification of

recurring operating increases needed to support the mission and

strategic plan of the National Park Service. The tool can also be

used to develop data to support requests for additional funds to meet increased operational needs.

Current Servicewide emphasis areas and OFS requests are

also used to help establish funding priorities and make funding

allocations. This section of the business plan examines funding

increases reported in the OFS for the operational base of the

Interpretation and Education Program from FY 2002 to FY 2005.

Increases in operational funding for I&E are considered in two

contexts: (1) as a total relative to increases for other functions and

(2) by their distribution among NPS regions.

Over the past four fiscal years (FY 2002 to FY 2005 inclusive), the

net Servicewide operational budget increase was approximately

$77.3 million. This increase was allocated among various areas of the National Park Service, as illustrated in the accompanying

Interpretation and Education Expenditures by Category: FY 1999-2004

Park Websites Loan Materials Community Programs

Audiovisual Park-Produced Publications

Educational Programs

Special Events

Junior Ranger Programs

Demonstrations and Performing Arts Formal Interpretation

Informal Interpretation

Visitor Centers/Contact Stations FY99 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 25
OFS by Function: 2002-2005

Maintenance

Park Support

Natural Resources Management

Law Enforcement and Protection

Interpretation and Education

Natural Resources Applied Research Resources Protection

Cultural Resources Applied Research

Visitor Use

Health/Safety

National Recreation and Preservation

External Adminstration Concessions/Management

pie chart. Maintenance received the largest funding increases between FY 2002 and FY 2005 (39%), followed by Natural Resources Management (18%), Park Support (11%) 1

, and Law

Enforcement and Protection (10%). Interpretation and Education

received the fifth largest share of gross funding increases at $27

million (8%). Of the smaller remaining increases, which account

for 14% overall, Natural Resources Applied Research received 6% of funding , External Administration received 2.7%, while the following programs received fractional increases up to 1% each: Resources Protection, Cultural Resources Applied Research,

Visitor Use, Health/Safety, and Concessions/Management.

Interpretation and Education Base Increases by Region

Of the $27 million base increases for I&E, parks and regions

received $16.4 million, and the Washington Office (WASO)

received $10.6 million for professional services and design. Of the

$16.4 million the Northeast Region received the largest amount

of I&E base fund increases at $4.7 million (29%), followed by

the Midwest Region at $2.6 million (16%), Pacific West Region at $2.2 million (14%), Intermountain Region at $2.2 million (13%),

National Capital Region at $1.9 million (11%), Southeast Region at $1.7 million (10%), and the Alaska Region at $1.1 million (7%).

Funded I&E requests as a proportion of total funded requests in each region ranged from 6% to 17%. Increases to I&E funding

comprised the greatest proportion of total funding (17%) in the Northeast Region and amounted to 12% of funded requests in the

Alaska, Intermountain, and National Capital Regions. While the

Pacific West, Intermountain, and Southeast Regions were among

the top four funding recipients across all NPS functions, I&E

received smaller proportions of total funding for total operational

increases in these regions (6% to 8%). Although 11% of funding

requests submitted by the Southeast Region were for I&E, funded

I&E requests amounted to only 6% of total funding received by

the region.

A Look Ahead

From FY 2002 to FY 2005 requests for increases in I&E funding

comprised an average of 8.33% of all requests submitted to OFS.

Requests for FY 2006 show a relative decline in I&E, which

amounted to only 4.78% of total requests. A reason for the decline may be that improvements in national security, visitor safety, and

partnerships are taking priority for limited funding in the coming

year. Requests for I&E funding in FY 2007 have returned to FY 2002-FY 2005 levels, for which they comprise 8.39% of total requests.

OFS Regional Funding Increases for I&E as a Proportion of Total Funded Requests: 2002-2005

$30,000,000

1 Park Support provides the management, administration, and support required for the efficient perfor- mance of the National Park System. Administrative

functions, such as financial management, personnel, procurement, data processing, and communications

services are encompassed as well as a number of inter- nal programs that provide necessary support functions. Also included are cooperative programs that involve other federal and non-federal agencies, organizations, and individuals to enhance the development and amenities of the parks.

Funding for I&E

Funding for All Other Functions

Alaska Intermountain Midwest National Capital Northeast Pacific West Southeast

26 National Park Service
i strong symooi 01 image of a bison remains a graphic element of the

recently refined NPS arrowhead. Used since the 1950s in applications ranging from uniforms. to , vehicle decals, the arrowhead helps communicate

the agency's mission to preserve natural and cul- tural resources. NPS photo
"S^Sr^ V~Nii?, '"jjT ,. **';

:x&-

M&" **Vi

<%' ."^w-.'/

*m

^. ^^^

ES52

• -US

- - - *

.

. ^

*

- -

lfV/-i

* ><f:

?>x\/ '^•TFfr"?? m

^ery Clajsroort)" where teachers Jearn about con; epts such as"ecoJoay,-$ense of place, stewar^'

hdtivics. NPSP'HOTJ • »

. »~ :;'< /; „ .
Current Park

Operations

Overview

This business plan divides all Interpretation and Education

Program activities into five functional areas in order to describe I&E operations. These functional areas detail the five areas of

business for which the National Park Service is responsible. These

include the following functional areas:

• Management and Administration

• Facilities

• Personal Services

• Interpretive Media and Technology

• Partnerships

The next component of the I&E business planning process is the establishment of operational standards. Standards were identified from policies, Director's Orders, and GPRA goals to describe

the duties and responsibilities for various program areas. These

standards are used to determine operational responsibilities

required of the I&E Program. The final step compared current park activities with the operational standards and identified gaps between required and actual measurements. A park survey was conducted in July and August of 2005 to provide a current assessment of park operations, enhance other data used in this plan, and establish measures to conduct a gap analysis. The 49

survey questions focused on training, operations, planning,

and I&E programs in the parks. The following pages describe

functional areas, activity categories, and I&E Program needs

identified through the business plan analysis process.

Management and Administration

The quality and scope of the Interpretation and Education

Program throughout the National Park Service depends on the leadership demonstrated by the Washington Office, regional

offices, park superintendents, and park chiefs of interpretation.

Without committed leadership, it is impossible to provide effective

visitor educational experiences.

Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness: The Washington Office, with cooperation from the field units, formulates policy, sets standards for personal services and

interpretive media, and identifies trends and emerging issues including Servicewide interpretive messages. Increasingly, the

Washington Office also coordinates and develops national pilot

initiatives and programs such as WebRangers and the Junior

Ranger Program. The Washington Office and field units together

advocate for I&E and oversee program quality, planning, and

budget allocation. The Washington Office partners with the NPS

Division of Training to administer a national competency-based

training and evaluation program for I&E functions. Similarly, the Washington Office partners with Harpers Ferry Interpretive

Design Center to develop and improve processes for interpretive

planning and creating interpretive media.

Regional offices ensure the dissemination of policy and standards,

assist the field with implementation, and have the obligation

to ensure that all parks in the region operate within policy and

at established standards. Regions also coordinate funding calls for I&E related programs such as Volunteers in Parks, Parks as Classrooms, and comprehensive interpretive plans. Regional chiefs assess the field's training needs and collaborate with park chiefs

for efficiency and efficacy of programs.

Park chiefs of interpretation direct the delivery of park programs and services, coordinate media development, and plan and

implement budgets. Chiefs of interpretation also hire, schedule,

supervise, and train field interpreters. The Chief ensures adherence to national policies and standards. The strength of

the National Park Service I&E Program is found in the decisions made by individual superintendents and I&E managers. As a

result, some I&E programs are more successful than others.

Effective managers support regional and national collaborative

efforts, seek diversified income streams, and choose to hold staff accountable for quality visitor contacts. They also value national standards, embrace outreach to underserved audiences, and

demand cyclic maintenance of interpretive media.

Individuals can deliver excellent personal services programs, but

require leadership to provide support and resources.

Effective Training

Providing comprehensive training to rangers, other employees,

volunteers, and partners who deliver I&E services will help to ensure consistency in the National Park System. This requires

appropriately staffed I&E programs where rangers are able to maintain a good balance of directly providing I&E services

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 29
As many as 70,000 practitioners

may currently represent

Interpretation and Education;

yet, only 3,000 receive training at

the national standard each year.

while taking on additional responsibilities of becoming trainers, coaches, and facilitators of other park staff, volunteers, and

partners. There are approximately 4,000 park ranger interpreter educators—2,000 permanent and 2,000 temporary. There were

about 54,000 volunteers who provided I&E services in Fiscal Year 2004. In addition, all uniformed NPS employees, many

concessioners, cooperating association employees, and other

partners interact with the public and possess some level of I&E

responsibility. As many as 70,000 practitioners may currently

represent Interpretation and Education; yet, only 3,000 receive

training at the national standard each year.

By 2008 a concerted effort should exist to ensure that all those who provide interpretive services to the public are well-trained

in the specific competencies I&E services they provide. The

National Park Service must provide multiple avenues for training

and development, including its own training, as well as learning

opportunities from appropriate professional organizations and

academic institutions. Since 1995 the Washington I&E Office and the Division of Training have established a consistent set of

training standards that seek to develop a competent, motivated,

and mission-focused interpretive workforce. The Interpretive

Development Program (IDP) provides training and development

30 National Park Service
Park managers and the public are brought together

by planning processes that consider policy, community values, logic, and analysis, nps photo

opportunities to NPS Interpretation and Education employees,

as well as to other NPS divisions, media specialists, volunteers,

concessioners, and partners who communicate about park

resources. The I DP creates, maintains, and revises a national curriculum. Interpretive Development Program training develops

and delivers a variety of learning opportunities for participants

to successfully master professional standards. However, the National Park Service must revise and make I&E training more

accessible to both its employees and partners. The IDP operates a Peer Review Certification Program that assesses 600 interpretive

products against national competency-based standards annually.

The Peer Review Certification Program is presently voluntary

and serves only a small portion of NPS I&E employees. The

program should be revised, simplified, and leveraged to ensure

National Park Service I&E employees model national standards and effectiveness to all I&E practitioners. A certification program

for volunteers and partners may be different from those for employees, but should incorporate the same baseline standards.

Evaluation

Evaluation of I&E activities and products provides accountability

and meaningful feedback about effectiveness. The 2005

Interpretation and Education Business Plan Survey reported that evaluation is very uneven across the National Park Service. By

2008 the NPS should evaluate all those who provide services to the public including staff, volunteers, cooperating associations,

concessioners, and partners.

Interpretive media at front-end, formative, and summative or

remedial stages should also be evaluated. It is impossible to accurately determine how much I&E service is provided by nonNational Park Service entities because limited data exist on this subject. The National Park Service has historically been effective

at measuring some quantitative results, and a few managers have

begun evaluating the qualitative effectiveness of I&E programs

and activities. A few evaluation tools are now used, including

program audits, the IDP Peer Review Certification Program,

visitor service cards, visitor use surveys, focus groups, and

contracted media and IDP studies. However, these primarily

assess program delivery without evaluating the effect of programs

or media on audiences. Many of these evaluation tools are general

in scope and do not provide targeted feedback on effectiveness

that can be used for improvement. Limited reliable data exist showing the outcomes and efficacy of I&E programs and

products.

No central, accessible database exists where results may be shared and applied to similar projects. A national evaluation program is needed to gain improvements in assessing program and media

impacts and outcomes, addressing staffing and funding trends and changes, providing relevant and useful visitor studies, meeting

the needs of new audiences and formal educators, and to provide

direction for program planning and improvement.

Planning

National Park Service planning provides the basis and rationale

for all decision-making. The planning process brings park managers and the public together to consider policy, community

values, logic, and analysis to create plans that serve as the basis for accountable coordinated action. The planning process generally flows from broad-scale management planning to more specific

strategic planning through four interrelated planning processes: general management planning, park strategic planning, long-range

interpretive planning, and annual interpretive implementation

planning. Although all aspects of the planning process are used to support decision-making for the I&E program, general

management plans and comprehensive interpretive plans (CIP)

serve as the foundation of I&E program planning.

The comprehensive interpretive planning process guides park

staff in defining themes, determining desired visitor experience

opportunities, and deciding which stories to tell, how to tell them,

and which audiences to target. Interpretive themes articulated in general management plans should correspond to those generated

by the CIP process. All interpretive services, including personal

services, interpretive media, and partnerships that work to support the delivery of interpretive programs, are based on and

coordinated with the CIP process. The resulting parkwide I&E

program thus communicates park significance and meanings in the most effective and efficient way. Park superintendents initiate the CIP process. The lifespan of a Long-Range Interpretive Plan (LRIP—a key element of the CIP process) is seven to ten years. Approximately 68% of park units either have a LRIP that is less than 10 years old or an LRIP that is currently in development.

One-third of park units do not possess completed LRIPs. The CIP process is crucial to an effective interpretation and

education program; therefore, the National Park Service should

hold superintendents and chiefs of interpretation accountable

to ensure by 2011 that 95% of the parks possess completed and

current comprehensive interpretive plans.

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 31
Summary Services 5 itatements Tabl e for Interpretation and Education Management and Administration Standards

Functional Area Program

Area Standard Source

Current Measurement Gap

Management and

Administration

Evaluation By 201 1, 95% of parks participate annually in the Visitor Service Card Survey. Visitor Service Card Survey88% 7%

Management and

Administration

Evaluation By 2008, 90% of parks audit annually three-quarters of concession-delivered interpretation programs to ensure they are accurate, appropriate, and related to park themes. Mgmnt Pol Ch 7, 10, DO-613% 77%

Management and

Administration

Evaluation By 2008, 90% of parks audit annually three-quarters of volunteer-delivered interpretation programs to ensure they are accurate, appropriate, and related to park themes.DO-6, -7 46% 44%

Management and

Administration

Evaluation By 2008, 90% of parks audit annually three-quarters of interpretation programs by cooperating associations to ensure they are accurate, appropriate, and related to park themes. DO-32 33% 57%

Management and

Administration

Evaluation By 2008, 80% of parks audit annually three-quarters of NPS-delivered interpretation programs to ensure they are accurate, appropriate, and related to park themes. DO-6 57% 23%

Management and

Administration

Evaluation By 2008, 87% of visitors understand the significance of park resources as measured by the

visitor services card. NPS Strategic Plan GPRA Goal 88% +1%

Management and

Administration

Evaluation By 2008, 95% of visitors are satisfied with appropriate park facilities, services and

recreational opportunities. NPS Strategic Plan GPRA Goal 96% +1%

Management and

Administration

Training Interpretive competencies and supporting curriculum are reviewed and revised by subject matter experts every four years. DO-6 14% 86%

Management and

Administration

Training 95% of supervisors receive 40 hours supervisory training per year. OPM 53% 42%

Management and

Administration

Training By 2008, 95% of parks with concession services have three quarters of their employees

receive training on NPS mission and park themes, resources, and uses. Mgmnt Pol Ch 7, DO-6, -7, -32 10% 85%

Management and

Administration

Training By 2008, 95% of parks have three quarters of their cooperating association employees

receive training on NPS mission and park themes, resources, and uses. Mgmnt Pol Ch 7, DO-6, -7, -32 53% 42%

Management and

Administration

Training By 2008, 95% of parks have three quarters of their volunteers receive training on NPS mission and park themes, resources, and uses. Mgmnt Pol Ch 7, DO-6, -7 55% 40%

Management and Training The Peer Review Certification Program is accessible to all permanent, seasonal, volunteer and

Administration partner NPS interpreters, as well as concessioners and employees in other divisions. DO-6 3,000 annual

l&E training

participants

6,700 additional l&E

practitioners

Management and Training Peer Review Certification Program operation (database, assessment procedures, writing Administration protocols, technology, tracking systems, and other efficiencies) enable capacity of up to 2,000 submitted interpretive products a year.

DO-6 600 products

per year

1,400 inter- pretive products per year

Management and

Administration

Planning By Fiscal Year 2011, 95% of parks have a comprehensive interpretive plan. Mgmnt Pol Ch 7, DO-6

67% 28%

32 National Park Service
Zion Canyon Visitor Center incorporates local natural elements and energy-efficient concepts

into an attractive design that saves energy and operating expenses while protecting the environment. NPS photo

Visitor use surveys are an effective evaluation

tool for measuring the delivery of interpretive and educational programs. nps/©jim gramann

Management and Administration

Summary Services Statement

In the table at left, the Standard column

indicates the services standard used to measure the success of the program

area. The Source column indicates the

source document used for the service standard. The Current Measurement and

Gap columns compute the difference between the service measurement and

the gap associated with achieving that measurement.

In most cases the gap is a deficit, indicating the need for additional resources to achieve the standard. In some

cases, the gap is a surplus (noted with a + sign), indicating a successful program

area which currently meets National Park

Service Interpretation and Education

standards. In some areas, measurement

data are not available.

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 33
Exhibits at the new Thomas Condon Paleontology

Center at John Day Fossil Beds National Monument

interpret complex themes such as extinction and

changing climates. The facility draws researchers and tourists alike who are interested in learning about plant and animal fossils, nps photo

Facilities

A wide array of facilities are used to provide Interpretation and

Education services including visitor centers, contact stations, education centers, research learning centers, museums, and

concession facilities, as well as outdoor interpretive fixtures such

as wayside exhibits and interpretive trails.

Visitor Centers, Contact Stations, Education Centers and Learning Centers

National park visitor centers and contact stations are multi- purpose facilities that provide basic orientation, interpretation,

education, safety, and information services. Although there are no

official definitions, contact stations tend to be smaller than visitor centers, and lack a formal theater or auditorium. Visitor center

staffing includes park rangers, volunteers, cooperating association

staff, and park partners. These facilities offer a starting point for an increasingly global visitor who wants to know where and how

they can find safe and enjoyable park experiences suited to their personal interests. Visitor centers and contact stations provide

personal amenities such as restrooms, water, and first aid. Most

recently constructed visitor centers include dedicated education

space (such as a workshop or multipurpose room) and outdoor

interpretation or orientation media (that are accessible 24 hours

a day and do not rquire heating, cooling, or staffing). At visitor centers people learn the park story, the scientific or cultural significance of park resources, how to visit park destinations, park

etiquette, and where and when to attend interpretive programs.

Cooperating association bookstores offer sales items that enhance

visitor understanding and enjoyment of the park. Interpretive

exhibits and films provide interpretation and orientation. From

1999 to 2004 many parks were compelled to reduce visitor center hours and field programs to keep facilities open. In the 2005

Interpretation and Education Business Plan Survey, 29% of the 259 park survey respondents reported a reduction in visitor center hours (adjustments, including hour reductions, are considered

"sustained" if the adjustments were based on visitor demand and

need and not on staff availability).

The National Park Service should seek to have 95% of visitor centers open during peak hours and seasons by 2008 and provide

alternative means of information when not open. Far too many

visitor center exhibits and films are aged; many were installed 40

to 50 years ago during the Mission 66 initiative. The National Park

Service should also develop a priority-based funding system for replacement and rehabilitation of obsolete and ineffective media.

Visitor centers need to meet several criteria: they should be the best and most cost-effective solution to providing interpretation,

orientation, and visitor services; sizes should be adequate for current and projected visitation; facility and media designs should

achieve desired outcomes; and facilities and media need to be

sustainable in terms of energy, materials, operations, and funding.

Visitor center construction and rehabilitation is reviewed by the Development Advisory Board for compliance with these and

other value-based criteria.

The National Park Service should also develop a

priority-based funding systemfor replacement and

rehabilitation of obsolete and ineffective media.

Over the past 15 years educational facilities have evolved to include education centers and research learning centers. Education centers provide park-based learning resources for teachers, students, and community groups. Some are housed in dedicated education facilities, such as the Crissy Field Center at Golden Gate National Recreation Area, but most operate out of multipurpose facilities managed by the I&E Program. Teachers use education centers to integrate park learning activities into their classroom curricula for students in kindergarten through grade

12. The few education centers in the NPS have demonstrated the value of blending the National Park Service mission with the need

of schools to strengthen science, math, history, and social science

learning.

Newer on the education scene are Research Learning Centers

established to foster stronger connections between scientists and park I&E personnel. The centers serve networks of parks

that are part of designated ecological zones of the United States. The centers operate as public-private partnerships that involve a wide range of people and organizations including researchers,

universities, educators, interpreters, and community groups. One of the primary goals of the centers is to attract non-NPS

scientists to conduct research in national parks. These scholars

34 National Park Service
Kings Mountain National Military Park features

exhibits about the Revolutionary War. NPS PHOTO

Facilities Summary Services Statement

The table below captures the standards for l&E Facilities. The Standard, column indi- cates the services standard used to measure the success of the program area. The

Source, column indicates the source docu- ment used to create the service standard. The Current Measurement and Gap col- umns compute the difference between the

service measurement and the gap associ- ated with achieving that measurement.

then assist managers by conducting research on prioritized park

science projects. In turn research results help park managers make

science-based decisions. Center educators develop a variety of programs and communications media for schools, park visitors, and the public that convey the excitement of remarkable scientific discoveries in the parks. Currently 16 centers exist nationwide,

with a long-term goal of establishing 32 centers throughout the National Park System.

Museum Exhibits

Exhibits provide opportunities for self-directed, multi-sensory

visitor experiences that can appeal to a wide variety of audiences.

Indoor exhibits often provide access to cultural artifacts. The

National Park Service museum collection contains over 90 million

objects. Some parks have facilities that allow them to display

objects from their specific collections on a permanent or rotating

basis. These objects enhance the park's story, and bring tangible

expressions of park resources to help communicate a park's

significance. However, there are many challenges associated with

displaying curatorial objects in a way that preserves their integrity. The Internet offers a means by which these items and archives can be made accessible to the public while still ensuring their preservation.

Outdoor Exhibits and Interpretive Trails Outdoor (wayside) exhibits and interpretive trails consistently

deliver valuable information and enjoyable experiences to the

public in most parks. Outdoor exhibits highlight points of special

interest and tangible elements of park resources for visitors driving and walking through a park. Interpretive trails offer discovery experiences for selected aspects of a park. Such trails are interpreted either through a series of wayside panels installed along the way or a booklet obtained at either end of the trail. Cooperating associations often cover the production costs of the

booklets.

The National Park Service maintains 12,225 wayside exhibits that usually last many years depending upon fabrication materials and

environmental conditions. Harpers Ferry Center is a national leader in producing outdoor exhibits, and studying message

effectiveness and design approaches, as well as conducting

systematic analyses of materials to maximize the longevity of

exhibits. The condition of the NPS inventory of outdoor exhibits and interpretive trails will be tracked through the Facilities Maintenance Software System (FMSS) to provide data for parks to maintain these assets.

Concession Facilities Six-hundred contracted concessioners operate a variety of

facilities in national parks, including lodging and food facilities, information areas, and facilities that offer recreational equipment

rentals or serve as staging areas to provide recreational and

interpretive experiences such as boat, bus, and bicycle tours. Concessioners sometimes share buildings with the National Park

Service, or build their own facilities according to NPS standards.

Summary Services Statements Table for Interpretation and Education Facilities Standards

Functional Area Program

Area Standard Source

Current Measurement Gap

Facilities Museum Exhibits/ 95% of interpretive exhibit content is in good/acceptable condition by 2016, according to the Outdoor Exhibits MIDS self-assessment tool for determining "good/acceptable" for both waysides and exhibits. Mgmnt Pol Ch 4, 5,

7, 8; DO-6; depending

on exhibit content, DO-9, -18, -25, -47, -50C, -51, -77

72% 23%

Facilities Museum Exhibits/ Outdoor Exhibits 80% of interpretive exhibit condition is in good/acceptable condition by 2016, according to the MIDS self-assessment tool for determining "good/acceptable" for both waysides and exhibits. Mgmnt Pol Ch 7, DO-5, DO-80

68% 12%

Facilities Museum Exhibits/ Outdoor Exhibits By 2010, 75% of park units have at least one quarter of their exhibits meet NPS graphic

standards.

DO-6, -52A, Mgmnt Pol Ch 7 50% 25%

Facilities Visitor Centers By 2008, 95% of visitor centers are open during peak hours and seasons and provide

alternative means of information when not staffed.

DO-6, -17 68% 27%

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 35
The Servicewide Interpretive Report documents

the number of interpretive and educational programs offered annually. Additional tools are needed to track all programs provided by partners, concessioners, and others in the national parks. NP5 PHOTO

Personal Services

Visitors enjoy interacting with park rangers, and anyone working

in a park who makes contact with the public can and should

provide appropriate and valuable visitor services. The ability to deliver a full-scale personal services program now depends on

individual superintendents and chiefs of interpretation who value, demand quality from, and support I&E staff, volunteers, cooperating association and concession personnel, and other partners.

It is critical for NPS leadership to recognize the importance of connecting diverse audiences to parks and nurturing future stewards of America's national heritage. Through park experiences,

visitors can develop a deep understanding and appreciation of park resources. To obtain a meaningful and satisfying park experience, visitors seek park staff who can answer their questions,

help them decide how to spend their time in the park, and inform

them about wonders that await their discovery. In addition to

basic information and orientation, personal interpretive services include opportunities for in-depth understanding and appreciation, such as walks, talks, campfire programs, roving contacts, and

Junior Ranger programs. "Formal programs" are scheduled I&E

activities prepared and presented by park I&E service providers. "Informal programs," often referred to as "roving," are planned

and intentional interactions with visitors. They provide contacts

in an informal setting on the visitor's terms, with a visitor asking

questions and an interpreter setting up an interpretive opportunity through their advanced knowledge of the park's stories and the application of interpretive techniques. Personal services programs presented in parks are tracked and recorded annually in the Servicewide Interpretive Report that documents the number

of programs offered and visitors served. The NPS needs improved

methods of tracking and gathering such data and for reporting all programs provided by park partners, concessioners, and others.

Education Programs

Curriculum-based educational programs complement school

curricula by matching a group's educational objectives with

park resources and interpretive themes. Interpretation and

Education staff develop park programs, in partnership with the teachers and schools served, based on national, state, and local content standards. Curriculum-based programs focus on stories and meanings attached to park resources, impacts affecting the condition of those resources, conservation or preservation

issues relevant to the park, the National Park System, and the

park's place within the System. For on-site delivery of these

programs, pre- and post-visit materials are provided to teachers and educational methodology is used to evaluate program

effectiveness. Since 1990 demand has increased steadily from

schools for NPS education programs. The NPS must continue to provide place-based curriculum-based programs, and develop

alternative means such as publications and distance learning

opportunities in cooperation with park partners.

Community Programs

National Park Service management policies direct I&E to reach out to park neighbors and community decision-makers

to stimulate discussions about the park and its values in local, regional, and national contexts. Community programs and special events such as pageants, anniversaries, dedications, festivals, and

other observances highlight meaningful connections between

the park, its resources, the event, and the public. These activities, as well as other I&E services, support civic engagement and

contribute to public understanding of the park's significance and

the significance of the National Park System. Special events often enhance the relationship between the park and the community

and often are presented as partnership activities.

Junior Ranger Programs

Junior Ranger programs are very popular among the visiting

public. There are 290 parks that offer visitors the opportunity to become Junior Rangers. Interested children, ages seven to twelve,

complete a series of activities during their park visit, share their answers with a park ranger, and receive an official Junior Ranger

badge or patch and Junior Ranger certificate. The program

guides young people and their families in a flexible, self-paced

way designed to help them see and interact with the park within

the limits of their own time. Most parks develop a booklet that consists of various activities and challenges that, when completed,

promote an understanding and appreciation of park resources and stewardship values. In 2005 the National Park Foundation

initiated a fundraising campaign to establish this program in all NPS units and provide a reliable supply of program booklets,

patches, and certificates. As part of this campaign, goals have been

set to increase involvement in these park programs and ensure

that 330 parks have a Junior Ranger program by 2011. Another

captivating addition to the in-park programs is WebRangers, which was introduced in 2003 as an Internet-based experience that has

already reached out to 65 countries.

36 National Park Service
Personal Services Summary

Services Statement

This Summary Services Statements table captures the standards for l&E Personal

Services. The Standard column indicates the services standard used to measure

the success of the program area. The

Source column indicates the source document used to create the service standard. The Current Measurement

and Gap columns compute the

difference between the service measurement and the gap associated with achieving that measurement.

In most cases the gap is a deficit, indicating the need for additional resources to achieve the standard,

and in some cases, the gap is a surplus

(noted by a + sign), indicating a

successful program area which currently meets NPS l&E standards.

Community programs connect people of all ages to the park and help increase understanding about valuable park resources. NP'

Summary Sen/ices Statements Table for Interpretation and Education Personal Services Standards

Functional Area Program

Area Standard Source

Current Measurement Gap

Personal

Services Formal Interpretation By 2008, informal interpretive contacts will increase by at least 10% from FY03 contacts. NPS Strategic Plan 13% +3%

Exhibits Formal Interpretation

Outdoor Exhibits By 2008, formal contacts will increase by at least 10% from FY03 contacts. NPS Strategic Plan 23% +13%

Exhibits Formal Interpretation

Outdoor Exhibits By 2008, attendance at demonstrations and performances will increase by at least 10%

from FY03 attendance. NPS Strategic Plan 7% 3%

Personal

Services Formal Interpretation By 2008, Junior Ranger contacts will increase by at least 10% from FY03 contacts. NPS Strategic Plan 4% 6%

Personal

Services Formal Interpretation By 2008, attendance at special events will increase by at least 10% from FY03 attendance. NPS Strategic Plan 7% 3%

Personal

Services Junior Ranger

Program

By 2008, Junior Ranger contacts will increase by at least 10% from FY03 contacts. NPS Strategic Plan 4% 6%

Personal

Services Junior Ranger

Program

By 201 1, 330 parks will have a Jr. Ranger program. DO-6 88% 12%

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 37
The Interpretation and

Education Program is essential

to the relevance of the National

Park System in the twenty-first

century, and is a corefunction of

the National Park Service. — NPS Director Mary A. Bomar

Interpretive Media and Technology

An expanding collection of interpretive media are available to enhance indoor and outdoor park experiences. Surveys

indicate high degrees of enjoyment and value associated with

traditional outdoor media such as wayside exhibits, brochures,

and bulletin cases (Visitor Services Project Compilation, 2004), but traditional and new technologies both offer opportunities

to satisfy diverse interests. New technologies offer fast-changing

possibilities for connecting visitors with experiences, resources, and meanings. Radio, GPS (Global Positioning System)-enabled,

and ambient technologies will increasingly allow people to receive

interpretation and orientation information on personal handheld

devices in response to specific locations and visitor interests.

The National Park Service must embrace appropriate technologies

as they become available, and become a leader in adapting

technology to enhance place-based learning in park settings and

at a distance. Many visitors physically go to national parks—and

many do so virtually. This second audience is partially responsible

for the creation of the busiest visitor center in the National Park

Service, www.nps.gov. Rapidly changing technology in the past

decade has transformed the quantity and type of NPS information

available to the public. New services include online publications,

websites, digital images, and video files, and audiovisual services such as interactive computer kiosks and holographic image

projection. Current educational research concludes that each person has a preference for learning in a highly individualized and specific way. Interpretive media and technology offer those

interested in national parks added opportunities for learning

experiences that fit their unique needs and interests, especially for people with certain disabilities. Individual parks are working with new technology, but coordinated evaluation, dissemination of

best practices, inventory, and the establishment of standards and

strategies for such tools is required to maximize visitor experience

and employee effectiveness.

Publications

Official park brochures are important for a valuable park

experience. Research has shown that park brochures are the most important interpretive media (personal or nonpersonal)

available (Visitor Services Project Compilation, 2004). The staff

at Harpers Ferry Center designs and produces these official park

brochures which provide a map of the park, address critical safety

and resource protection issues, and describe significant park

resources. Park brochures serve as the primary informational product that visitors seek and receive.

Almost 100 parks in the National Park System still need an official park brochure to provide basic information and orientation

for park visitors. Historically, parks with high visitation have not received an adequate supply of brochures to provide even one copy per vehicle. Due to recent budget reductions in the publications program at Harpers Ferry Center, a graduated system

of distribution based on visitation is in place. Parks with high

visitation now receive an assured allocation of 50,000 brochures

annually; parks with moderate visitation receive 20,000 annually;

parks with low visitation receive 10,000 annually. This reduction

is compelling parks to use essential operational dollars to make

up the deficit or locate funding from other sources such as cooperating associations, friends groups, or the Recreational Fee Demonstration Program. The National Park Service should

ensure that 100% of parks receive an adequate allotment of park

brochures to meet demands from visitation with a 1 to 9 ratio and

also ensure that appropriate and adequate numbers of brochures

are available in other languages as needed.

Audiovisual Media

Park films remain a valuable part of the visitor experience—they can forge emotional and intellectual connections to the park,

tell complex stories, and show visitors areas and resources that may be inaccessible to them. Films require a theater, projection

system, and ongoing maintenance. In the business plan survey, 47% of the 265 respondents indicated that their park film is more

than 10 years old. Fifty-three of the survey respondents indicated

their park films were not captioned. Additionally, the quality and

effectiveness of older films is limited, since they may not appeal

to young people raised in a visually dynamic culture who expect

contemporary and sophisticated presentations. Only 31 parks

indicated their film was offered in another language. The National Park Service should seek to have 95% of the films captioned and

audio-described by 2010, and where appropriate, greater effort should be made to offer films in other languages through dubbing,

subtitles, or audio-assisted headphones. Other audiovisual media used in parks include self-directed audio tours using MP3

technology (using small, high-quality audio and video files easily transmitted on the Internet), outdoor audio stations, orientation

videos, and short video segments integrated into exhibits.

38 National Park Service
Internet Publications

Internet publications contain the most comprehensive and

current electronic information made publicly available by the National Park Service. Included are websites, digital images, and

access to libraries of NPS graphic information such as maps and

electronic documents.

The National Park Service website has evolved into a gateway for

all park units and park programs. Launched in October of 1994

as ParkNet, www.NPS.gov provides basic information about each

of the 390 units of the National Park System to people around the world. Although all park websites are unified in graphic design,

each site contains specific information about the unique resources

of a particular park unit. Responsibility for www.NPS.gov content

clearly belongs to NPS divisions of interpretation and education.

Over the past five years, the number of web page accesses for NPS.gov has increased from 1,058,287 a day (1999) to 1.4 million

a day (2004). This growth shows the increasing popularity of the

Internet and a potential development area for the I&E program.

For the National Park Service to remain relevant to Internet

visitors, web pages must be developed in multiple languages,

especially for parks that receive a high level of international

visitation or for those located in highly diverse areas where

English is not the primary language.

Interpretive Media and

Technology Summary

Services Statement

The table below captures the

standards for l&E Interpretive Media

and Technology. The Standard column

indicates the services standard used to measure the success of the program

area. The Source column indicates the source document used to create the service standard. The Current Measurement and Gap columns compute the difference between

the service measurement and the gap associated with achieving that measurement.

In most cases the gap is a deficit, indicating the need for additional resources to achieve the standard,

and in some cases, the gap is a surplus (noted by a + sign), indicating

a successful program area which

currently meets NPS l&E standards.

Audiovisual, computer-generated media, and interactive displays integrated into

visitor center exhibits help convey park

stories in compelling ways, nps photo

Summary Services Statements Table for Interpretation and Education Interpretive Media and Education Standards

Functional Area Program

Area Standard Source

Current Measurement Gap

Interpretive Media

and Technology

Audiovisual 75% of park films are less than 10 years old by 2016. Mgmnt Pol Ch 7 53% 22%

Interpretive Media

and Technology

Audiovisual 95% of park films being shown are captioned for the hearing impaired by 2010. DO-42

Mgmnt Pol Ch 7 53% 42%

Interpretive Media

and Technology

Audiovisual 5% of park films are offered in a language other than English to enhance reaching local or targeted populations by 2016. DO-75A

Mgmnt Pol Ch 7 13% +8%

Interpretive Media

and Technology

Audiovisual and

Internet Publicati ons

By 2010, 25% of parks offer distance learning opportunities DO-6, -11 A, -70 Mgmnt Pol Ch 7 25%

Interpretive Media

and Technology

Internet

Publications 75% of parks have posted their curriculum-based education program on their web

page. DO-6 83% +8%

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 39
Volunteer programs provide special ways for people to participate in the stewardship of their national parks. Investment in park volunteer pro- grams ensures a more cost-effective l&E Program

while providing more opportunities for the public

to participate in sustaining the NPS legacy. NPS PHOTO

Partnerships

An effectively operated park visitor services program engages

the help of a variety of partners. The need for Interpretation

and Education services to be relevant to the many and diverse audiences of the twenty-first century cannot be fully satisfied solely through programs delivered directly by the NPS.

The National Park Service must leverage its capacity and involve other partners. Many organizations with compatible purposes

exist that are willing and able to work in partnership with the NPS

to deliver interpretation and education services. These include cooperating associations, concessions, local historical societies, museums, colleges and universities, school districts, tourism

commissions, conservation groups, health and fitness clubs,

libraries, and others. A number of park units have successfully

engaged such partners in delivering a broad range of services.

Additional parks could benefit by learning from the success of

others and the sharing of innovative approaches and practices.

Working with others to support a standard deserved and required

by national park resources requires a significant allocation of

resources. The National Park Service must invest in professional

I&E Rangers to lead, coach, act as models and examples for, and

facilitate the effective work of volunteers and other partners.

Volunteers in Parks (VIP)

In 2004 volunteers contributed 1.9 million hours of interpretation

and education services to visitors. Volunteers in a variety of

settings provide substantial assistance in connecting visitors to the parks. They often bring personal experiences and associations

that enrich the story or message of a particular park. Volunteers

assist park staff in almost all areas of park operations, including

maintenance, resources management, administration, and visitor services. Seventy-nine percent of respondents to the business

plan survey indicated their park's VIP coordinator is a collateral duty within the interpretation division. In FY 2004 approximately

54,054 volunteers donated 1,973,951 hours of service to interpretation and education activities. This represents 39% of the

5.2 million volunteer hours donated to the NPS. Valued at $17.19 an hour, I&E volunteer time in FY 2004 was worth a total gross

value of $33.9 million. Interpretation and education volunteer- provided services represented an additional 949 FTE of park

labor, or a 38% increase over the total 2,485 staff FTEs.

Although volunteers work in all aspects of park operations, an

increasingly large number of volunteer hours are devoted to I&E

services. The graph below shows the categories served by VIPs

over the past four years, with interpretation growing from 35%

in FY 2001 to 39% in FY 2004. In addition to volunteer hours

Distribution of Volunteer Hours

6,000,000

5,000,000

FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04

8 Other

Administrative

Protection 9 Campground Host

I Maintenance

Resource Management

Interpretation

40 National Park Service
Cooperating associations

respond to park needs by

developing tailored products,

such as resource-specific books

and videos. Sales associates

often provide and enhance

visitor information services by

answering visitor questions,

and in some parks, by offering

interpretive programs.

devoted specifically to interpretation, many interpretive benefits

are indirectly realized in complementary volunteer categories. For example, campground hosts and volunteers who support

protection functions often interact with visitors through casual conversation and provide valuable informal, interpretive services. In FY 2005 and 2006, a special study of the NPS VIP Program will be carried out to evaluate this Servicewide function.

Cooperating Associations

Cooperating associations share a rich history with the National Park Service that began soon after creation of the NPS in 1916. Beginning in the 1920s, National Park Service naturalists and historians collaborated with private citizens in forming

nonprofit organizations to assist parks and serve park visitors. From the beginning, these nonprofit organizations supported

park programs and projects that were not readily achievable through the use of federal funds and personnel. The first of

these organizations was the Yosemite Museum Association

(now Yosemite Association), established in 1923 to lead a fundraising effort for a museum in Yosemite Valley. Cooperating

associations now work under agreement with the NPS to provide

public education, interpretation, research, and related visitor services. Since 1932 cooperating associations have been mission- based organizations that support park interpretive programs

by providing publications and other items that enhance the

interpretive story, allow visitors to explore particular interests, and

enable them to take the park story home through their purchases.

An upcoming change in cooperating association policy will require all cooperating associations to develop a scope of sales statement to more completely link NPS and association missions.

Cooperating associations are nonprofit corporations that adhere

to laws governing federal tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organizations.

They are subject to NPS Management Policies and Director's Order #32: Cooperating Associations. When cooperating associations engage in fundraising to support interpretation and education they are also subject to Director's Order #21: Donations and

Fundraising. In 1937 recognition of the legal status of cooperating associations as nonprofit, state-chartered entities working

in cooperation with the NPS was placed in the Appropriations Act for the Department of the Interior. Cooperating associations respond to park needs by developing tailored products,

such as resource-specific books and videos. Sales associates often provide and enhance visitor information services by answering visitor questions, and in some parks, by offering interpretive programs. In 2004, 67 cooperating associations returned $28.7

million in donations and in-kind services from gross revenues of

$119 million. The percentage of aid to revenue is 24%. The funds

are most often used for interpretive operations, visitor assistance,

research, and free publications.

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 41
A community partnership supports a floating laboratory and learning center called Forever

Earth at Lake Mead National Recreation Area. The program enhances environmental monitoring efforts and provides educational opportunities for students and researchers, nps photo

Partnerships Services Summary

Services Statement

The table below captures the standards

for l&E Partnerships. The Standard col- umn indicates the services standard used

to measure the success of the program

area. The Source column indicates the

source document used to create the ser- vice standard. The Current Measurement

and Gap columns compute the difference between the service measurement and

the gap associated with achieving that measurement. In most cases the gap is a

deficit, indicating the need for additional resources to achieve the standard, and in some cases, the gap is a surplus (noted by

a + sign), indicating a successful program

area that currently meets NPS l&E standards.

Friends Groups

Friends groups are organizations that serve as citizen stewards

of national parks. Such groups can be small or large, and local or

national in scope. They help parks with volunteer work, support

park programs and activities, and engage in fundraising on

behalf of the park. Friends groups often provide a way for local constituents and other interested individuals to take an active role promoting park purposes and broadening community awareness and involvement. Friends Groups often interact extensively

with l&E staff on special events, publications, and fundraising.

Information about the numbers and specific activities carried out by friends groups has not been systematically collected by

the National Park Service, although this is starting to change. In the future, this information will be helpful in coordinating and

developing a comprehensive national l&E Program. Similar to cooperating associations, they operate under formal agreements

with the NPS and are subject to NPS Management Policies and

Director's Order #21: Donations and Fundraising.

Concessioners

There are 600 concessioners contracts in the NPS. While only

33% of all park units have concessions, 71% of all NPS visitors

visit parks with concession services. This significant demand for concession services emphasizes the importance of investing to assure high-quality concessioner-provided interpretive services. Concessioners are contracted commercial operations that help

parks achieve necessary and appropriate visitor experiences

as identified in a commercial services plan. They may provide

interpretive and educational services as part of their contractual or operational agreement, in addition to providing visitor services such as food or lodging. These businesses draw substantial income from national park visitors and provide opportunities

that enhance visitor experiences and can help to protect park

resources. When a concessioner provides visitor use services they possess an opportunity to share park information. For example,

a food service concessioner may provide placemats that feature messages and graphics about park wildlife or they may provide

only bulk condiments and explain how this helps reduce waste. In many lodging operations, concessioners place materials in hotel rooms that provide visitors information about the park while

also offering concierge services to help visitors more thoroughly

enjoy their park experience. Concession employees also lead tour activities, such as horseback riding or rafting—and provide

interpretive experiences as part of the outing.

Other Interpretation and Education Partnerships

In addition to the partnerships mentioned, many groups

operating outside of park boundaries and through permit systems

offer l&E programs that connect people to parks. These include partnerships with local school districts, colleges and universities, adult education services, museums, historical societies, commercial entities, and other organizations. The value of these partnership contributions is difficult to quantify; however, they

clearly are an important part of the delivery of services and

greatly extend the influence of NPS interpretation and education.

These partnership services could be enhanced and made more

visible with modest investments by the NPS. In particular, the NPS could collaborate with partners to evaluate and

certify content, brand partnerships, and create a calendar of

interpretation and education programs for park visitors and

gateway communities. To assure the continuing quality and

improvement of the full range of l&E services for the future,

it is important that information about these invaluable l&E

partnerships becomes more readily available to visitors.

Summary Services Statements Table for Interpretation and Education Partnerships Standards

Functional Area Program

Area Standard Source

Current Measurement Gap

Partnerships Cooperating

Association 100% of parks have a scope of sales statement for the cooperating association. RM-32 60% 40%

Partnerships Cooperating

Association 15% of all gross sales revenue from park cooperating associations comes in aid to NPS. RM-32 24% +9%

Partnerships Volunteers

in Parks By 2008, the number of volunteer hours will be 5.3 million. NPS Strategic Plan 2.0 Million

3.3 Million

42 National Park Service
Individual parks are exploring innovative technologies such as podcasts, webcams. and

interactive media to provide dynamic information and interpretation, nps photo composition

Interpretation and 21st-century Relevancy

To be relevant, meaningful, and effective in the twenty-first

century, the National Park Service must reach out to, engage, and

cultivate the support of an increasingly diverse constituency. The

more people care about parks, the more they will support the care

for parks. The more national park audiences have experiences

that connect them to these meaningful places, the more they will value these places. Interpretation and education seeks to provide

opportunities for audiences to make those connections. The

purpose of the national Interpretation and Education Program

is acknowledged as core to meeting the National Park Service

mission.

A successful I&E Program is critical to the vitality of the National Park System.

So far, this document identifies park-based I&E Program

successes, challenges, and funding needs. The following section

articulates how Servicewide interpretation and education efforts can increase effectiveness and efficiency by leveraging success and

demonstrating value. The recommended priorities and strategies

suggest next best steps and address the lack of data available for a comprehensive analysis and understanding of the national I&E

Program.

Because the recommendations describe initial actions intended

to leverage national investments to benefit individual parks

Servicewide, few specific cost estimates are available at this time. Most of the following recommendations require a scoping

process before their actual costs can be identified. Such a scoping process will have to be part of a larger strategic effort.

It is clear that evaluating I&E effectiveness, investing in partner

relationships, training, and national standards, reaching out

to underserved audiences, using media and technology in innovative ways, and cultivating effective leadership are all critical to the future of National Park Service I&E efforts. The scope, sequence, timetable, and flexibility of these investments must be

coordinated by and fit into a larger strategic plan and vision.

The following recommendations can inform that larger strategy and vision in terms of efficiencies and effectiveness. They do not

describe specific methods, only the first required steps. Other

documents, such as the National Education Council's Action

Plan will be required to articulate the larger vision, illustrate the

specific strategies, and determine the best tactics for acquiring

that vision. Some of those strategic efforts have begun. Future documents will depend on lessons learned from the first steps encouraged here.

Conditions are more challenging for National Park Service

interpreters and educators than ever before. In many places, there are fewer rangers and more responsibilities. This document

specifies increased costs for personnel. It has not described

the increased time demands of the budget process, interpretive

planning, media planning, web page design, and more. It is becoming increasingly difficult to do what is already required

and reach out to the audiences that will make the National Park

Service relevant in the twenty-first century.

This plan calls for park rangers to play the critical

role in enabling those not employed by the National

Park Service to work at professional standards and

help engage the public in stewardship.

The park ranger is critical to that success. While there are thousands more volunteers, cooperative association employees,

concessioners, and other partners providing I&E services than employees, the park ranger is still viewed as the trusted authority

and caretaker of the nation's most valued places. The majority of park rangers know they can not accomplish their mission alone. Like Stephen T. Mather, the first Director of the National Park

Service, field rangers know that it is ultimately the public who

will decide if national parks are worthy of stewardship. This plan

calls for park rangers to play the critical role in enabling those not employed by the National Park Service to work at professional standards and help engage the public in stewardship.

A commitment to leverage the work of park rangers to increase the effectiveness of others will require many different forms,

models, and management solutions. In some parks, effective approaches already exist. Others parks will have to re-tool the

factory a bit—others, to a much larger degree. The effort will take

time, leadership, evaluation, a commitment to standards, and a passion for the preservation ideal.

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 43
Activities at Crater Lake National Park vary from enjoying incomparable vistas to hiking in old growth forests, camping, or even cross-country

skiing during the long Cascade winters. Outdoor

exhibits and interpretive trails highlight points of

special interest for visitors driving and walking through a park, photo ©finley-holiday films

.* 1 Pj

%>

¥*fj

l^AN,

i i*
Priorities and

Strategies

Interpretation and Education Priorities

Much of the future success of the national Interpretation and

Education Program relies on the investment of individual managers and partners. National Park Service relevance in the twenty-first century requires public involvement with the

intangible meanings of special places. Beauty, health, wonder,

democracy, struggle, and freedom are all difficult to quantify.

However, these values are the engines that originally created

national parks and continue to foster stewardship. To manage

only tangible resources is to abrogate the power of the parks.

Interpretation and education must be a rigorous and accountable

National Park Service function—but it must also be understood as

critical to a synthesis of the preservation and enjoyment mission.

Specify Core Function

The National Park Service must develop measurable operating

standards and "core" function statements for a healthy and

effective Interpretation and Education Program. While most

managers and leaders value interpretation and education, few

tools exist to help them recognize or strive for quality programs

that meet a consistent national standard. The core implications of cutting staff or programs and the effects on mission are not

clearly understood or agreed upon. Current operating standards

for planning and executing programs are not comprehensive," are

rarely measurable, and often fall short of gauging the true needs

and value of the Interpretation and Education Program.

A process should be developed for implementing identified standards, measuring their attainment, assessing their outcomes,

and further prioritizing investment activity. Metrics for measuring

the success of leadership regarding Interpretation and Education

operations should also be created. It is important that this effort recognize the differing needs and resources of individual parks

and sites. Ideally, core function statements could universally describe the desired outcome of Interpretation and Education programs while allowing parks to use a variety of activities, each

with identified operating standards, to produce desired outcomes.

Staff to Support Core Functions

The National Park Service should restore and sustain permanent

and seasonal Interpretation and Education positions necessary to accomplish core functions and to meet operating standards.

A successful Interpretation and Education Program requires the National Park Service to maintain a highly skilled ranger staff. Permanent rangers with graduate level knowledge of subject

matter, a deep understanding of their audiences, and mastery of

interpretive and educational techniques are foundational to the

Interpretation and Education Program. These individuals model

standards, coach, and teach others in I&E work, advocate for the visitor, are critical for the development of interpretive media,

technology, and curriculum-based programs, and represent the essence of the National Park Service. Temporary and seasonal rangers support the work of permanent rangers, particularly

during peak periods of visitation. Without them, many visitors would never encounter an individual in a "flat hat," one the agency's strongest visual symbols. The ranger workforce has

clearly been reduced and many standards are not being met.

Inventory and Data

An inventory and reporting system should be developed for all National Park Service I&E practitioners. Few data presently exist indicating the I&E contribution of cooperating associations,

concessions, and other partners, and existing reporting for NPS

programs is limited. The Servicewide Interpretive Report should

be redesigned to streamline field reporting requirements and

collect information specific to measuring attainment of operating

standards and benchmarks for core functions Use of Facilities Management Software System (FMSS) as a tool for data gathering

and reporting should also be included. Creating such systems

is critical for increasing I&E effectiveness, sharing standards,

providing training, evaluating outcomes, and investing resources

wisely. Understanding the role of all I&E practitioners is also

essential to the success of any future strategic planning.

Similar data should be generated for technological, thematic,

and programmatic based programs (i.e., "Teaching with Historic Places" or WebRangers) offered outside of parks. It is also imperative that current data be maintained on numbers and

condition of interpretive media and plans. This business plan

provides an analysis of park-based I&E efforts. With a more

comprehensive understanding of how park-based and other programs work together, identifying effective strategies and

investments will be possible.

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 45
Parks withfull-time volunteer

program coordinators have

demonstrated their ability to recruit and sustain an effective

and dependable volunteerforce.

Investment in the appropriate

FTEfor each park volunteer

program will ensure a more

cost-effective I&E Program while

providing more opportunities

for the public to participate in

sustaining the NPS legacy.

Leverage Partnership Relationships

The National Park Service can increase I&E effectiveness and

accountability by enabling volunteers, concessions, cooperating

associations, and other partners to provide I&E services according to Servicewide national standards in collaboration with NPS staff. By embracing and shaping the work of others, the National Park Service can increase the quantity and quality of visitor contacts. Collaborating in a way that embraces

professional standards will increase visitor understanding and

appreciation. This requires all NPS I&E practitioners, employees

and partners, personal service providers, and media professionals,

to have access to training, coaching, and program evaluation

results—all at national standards. The role of NPS permanent

and seasonal staff remains essential to this effort. National Park

Service interpreters and educators are necessary to provide the

leadership, example, and standards for all partners to deliver

effective I&E services.

Partners

Interpretation and education operational capacity must be

improved in parks by actively pursing additional partnerships.

Many organizations with compatible purposes—historical

societies, museums, colleges and universities, school districts, tourism commissions, conservation groups, health organizations,

libraries, and others—are willing and able to work in partnership

to deliver I&E services. A number of park units have successfully

engaged such partners in delivering a broad range of services. Many other parks could benefit by learning from their successes and the sharing of approaches and best practices.

Partner Credentialing

Create a national program to credential I&E partners. The

success of park programs using partners to provide I&E services demonstrates an opportunity to increase public outreach. A

program requiring standards of operation that lead to credentials from the National Park Service will result in higher levels of

service and quality, while allowing parks the flexibility to offer complementary, rather than competing, programs.

Volunteers in Parks (VIP) Servicewide capacity must increase to deliver quality

interpretation and education programs by investing in the administration and coordination of volunteer programs. Parks

presently receive 1.9 million hours of supplemental volunteer

I&E services at a value of $33.9 million. Additionally, volunteer programs provide Americans with special ways to participate

in the stewardship of their national parks. Parks need VIP

coordinators with time dedicated to their volunteer program to

realize an investment. Volunteers in Parks program duties are

collateral, and the volunteer programs may suffer as a result. Parks with full-time volunteer program coordinators have demonstrated

their ability to recruit and sustain an effective and dependable

volunteer force. Investment in the appropriate FTE for each

park volunteer program will ensure a more cost-effective I&E

Program—and support all aspects of park operations (not only

I&E)—while providing more opportunities for the public to

participate in sustaining the NPS legacy.

Training

Systemwide support is necessary for the development of a Service Delivery Systemfor Public Engagement. This is a distance learning and credentialing platform used to both teach I&E skills and competencies as well as test for knowledge. The system is composed of learning and testing modules delivered online. Such

a platform can be designed to provide learning and accountability

for various types of I&E practitioners.

National Park Service I&E employees should be held to the most

comprehensive standards and act as models and coaches for volunteers and other partners. Partners and volunteers should be required to meet national standards in the competency areas

in which they work. Standards could be similar to those to be

developed for first-year seasonal employees, with opportunities

for progressive development over time. For example, a volunteer working in a visitor center should meet national standards for informal visitor contacts. Those who give formal programs should meet the appropriate national standards for such competencies.

Concession contracts could require the demonstration of

standards. Partners could have direct access to National Park

Service training.

Modules and assessments can be designed to address subject matter accuracy, civic engagement, and partnership competencies.

National Park Service employees could complete modules on

coordinating interpretive media development as a condition of

46 National Park Service
Author David McCullough offers a group of NPS

trainees his perspectives on notable events in American history, nps photo

working with Harpers Ferry Center or a contractor. Similarly, contractors for media projects could use the Service Delivery

System to both learn about National Park Service requirements,

as well as demonstrate their mastery of required standards. Costs

for the Service Delivery System for Public Engagement could be

shared by outside learners from related professions.

The Interpretive Development Program (IDP) has initiated development of the Service Delivery System for Public Engagement. The project will make all 10 Office of Personnel Management validated interpretive competencies accessible through online tutorials and project development modules.

Professional and national standards in the form of knowledge,

skills, abilities, and behaviors will be easily available to National

Park Service employees, volunteers, partners, and concessioners. Working with the Eppley Institute for Parks and Public Lands

(Indiana University), the IDP is already invested in a two-year,

$250,000 project that will create associated learning products.

In the long term, this effort requires a database administrator, a curriculum revision administrator, and annual operating funding

to meet the standard of updating and creating competencybased learning materials once every four years. Potential to include additional National Park Service career fields such as partnerships, interpretive media, and others is great.

Peer Review Certification Permanent interpreters and seasonal interpreters must be

required to certify in relevant and park-appropriate interpretive

competencies. The Office of Personnel Management will validate 10 interpretive competencies for integration into human

resource procedures in 2007, simplifying the current certification process to meet this goal. Requiring certification will establish a consistent Servicewide professional standard and will fortify the full-performance interpretive ranger as the coach, mentor,

and facilitator for volunteer, partner, other National Park Service

divisions, and concession interpreters.

Evaluate l&E Effectiveness

High quality program and media evaluation, systematically

applied, is necessary to ensure that the NPS I&E Program is based on sound decision-making that results in cost effectiveness and

financial accountability at all levels. Evaluation is also critically

important for continuous improvement of I&E programs and

services that lead to achievement of the NPS mission.

Because reliable I&E evaluation data and systems across the Service are severely lacking at present, it is necessary to create a Servicewide Evaluation Strategy and make a significant financial investment in program and media evaluation. This will allow

the NPS to develop a Servicewide commitment to evaluation

that facilitates coordination, fosters information exchange, and

supports application of results. It will also create a National Park

Service workforce with the motivation, knowledge, skill, and

ability to thoroughly integrate evaluation practices into their daily

work.

To accomplish this, the Interpretation & Education Program must:

• Establish a means for ongoing coordination of I&E evaluation

functions.

• Develop an I&E evaluation information management system.

• Incorporate cost-effective evaluation and monitoring as part of all interpretive media development.

• Provide training to motivate employees and enhance the agency's evaluation capacity.

• Use evaluation results to identify and disseminate best practices

in evaluation and in I&E, and develop tools and products to support implementation.

Recommended Actions:

1. Convene with the NPS Advisory Board an Evaluation Summit

(Blue Ribbon Scholars) to guide and verify the Servicewide I&E

Evaluation Strategy.

2. Conduct pilot evaluation projects.

3. Create an interpreters' and managers' toolkit of evaluation

materials.

4. Identify lessons learned, best practices, gaps, and evaluation needs by reviewing existing research.

5. Create an online evaluation library.

6. Add evaluation competencies to Interpretive Development

Program; establish standards; establish training module.

7. Engage the I&E networks at the park, regional, and national levels to implement the Servicewide I&E evaluation strategy.

8. Establish an I&E Evaluation Coordinator at the national level to coordinate the above functions and to sustain communication

with other NPS offices conducting various types of evaluation.

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 47
Coordination between interpretation and

education efforts, information technology

programs, and communications initiatives will increase the relevancy of the National Park System.

NP5 PHOTO

Study National Park Service Audiences

Mechanisms and tools must be created for the study of potential National Park Service audiences. Only by understanding how

different audiences view parks, what they find meaningful,

and how they choose to invest their time and money, can I&E

effectively plan and deliver cost-effective and relevant services. The demographics of the United States are changing rapidly

and dramatically—yet most agree that National Park Service

visitor demographics have generally remained the same. Only by

reaching out to new constituencies can the National Park Service achieve relevance and mission success in the twenty-first century.

All parks have the potential to serve unique audiences. A simple

and economical mechanism for studying audiences will allow

for much greater I&E effectiveness. All audience studies should

coordinate with other visitor studies programs such as those conducted by the NPS Social Science office, by other government

agencies, and by groups such as tourism councils.

Create an I&E Technology Strategy

The purpose of the National Park Service is grounded in the park experience. The NPS is responsible for many of America's most important tangible resources and the intangible meanings

they represent. Technology cannot replace physical interaction, nor can technology replacea personal encounter with a park

ranger, volunteer, or other partner. Still, innovative use of

existing and emerging technology can maximize both the visitor's experience as well as employee effectiveness. Technology can

provide opportunities for connecting with resources in ways

only imagined. Visitors, especially the young, are using new

tools to access information accessible in many forms that can

address thematic subjects for multiple parks and resources. These technological tools provide outstanding opportunities for

orientation, information, and in-depth learning—an improved

experience that fosters connection with and stewardship of parks.

Parks are experimenting with technological innovations such

as webcams, mobile communications, and podcasts. The

Intepretation and Education Program should work with the

Office of the Chief Information Officer and other experts to create a coordinated strategy that encourages the application of technology in I&E services with an emphasis on evaluating

effectiveness and sharing best practices.

Upgrade Interpretive Media to Meet

21st-century Standards

The National Park Service should ensure that 100% of parks

receive an adequate allocation of official park brochures to meet demands from visitation, with a 1 to 9 ratio. Recent reductions imposed on the publications program at Harpers Ferry Center

have severely restricted allocations of these documents to parks.

This reduction will cause parks to draw from limited operational

dollars to make up the deficit or locate funding from other sources such as cooperating associations, friends groups, or the Recreational Fee Demonstration Program.

Additionally the Media Inventory Database System (MIDS) will transition to the Facilities Management Software System (FMSS)

by 2008 to track the condition of interpretive media in all parks.

Priority should be given to evaluating effectiveness (condition

assessments) and replacing ineffective media with those approaches that meet basic needs. Parks can also increase the use

of the World Wide Web to display and provide information about more of the vast museum collections of the National Park System.

Harpers Ferry Center has traditionally been the keeper of national standards for interpretive media and provided planning, design,

and production services. This role is even more critical now as parks often use their own resources and collaborate with others

to fund media projects. The National Park Service should make

every effort to integrate standards, planning, and strategies for I&E personal services and interpretive media.

Informed Leadership

The National Park Service must nurture and support an informed

leadership that appreciates the importance of I&E in fulfilling the core mission of the agency. Data from the Administrative Finance

System (AFS) and annual Servicewide interpretive reports show

a decline in investments in I&E. When value decisions and

trade-offs occur under stringent fiscal conditions, it is important

for NPS leaders to possess a strong understanding of how I&E

directly supports the mission of the National Park Service.

The National Education Council and National Leadership

Council could help reinforce the importance of I&E by jointly

48 National Park Service
Cost analyses can be conducted

to ensure that the programs are

self-sustaining; this will allow

managers to make effective decisions about the range ofprograms and experiences offered,

and will provide immediate

feedback as to whether or not the

programs are effective.

endorsing a "national statement of significance" for I&E and

actively promoting the advantages of sustaining investments and

increasing capacity through partners.

Fund Interpretive Planning

Comprehensive interpretive plans (CIP) identify important park

themes and visitor experiences through a public involvement

process. Superintendents who have chosen to complete a CIP

have achieved efficient operations through an organized plan

to meet visitor experience goals. One-third of all parks have

developed such plans; another third is in progress; and a final third is scheduled for future development. Director's Order #6

requires that each park develop a comprehensive interpretive

plan. Field staffs have developed a cost-effective planning process over the past five years to achieve this goal. The estimated cost for each plan is $10,000 to $35,000, depending on the size of the park

and complexity of the program. The estimated amount necessary

to complete the 112 future plans is $2.5 million. Plans completed

to date have been funded with HFC base funds, ONPS base

funds, Fee Demonstration Program funds, and donated funds.

Strategies for Increasing Non-Appropriated

Funding and Resources

Because government funds will probably remain limited and

competitive, the National Park Service I&E Program must expand

its entrepreneurial efforts to fulfill its programmatic needs. Newly

generated revenue and/or resources would help to increase I&E capacity and effectiveness. The following strategies vary in complexity and require further study before implementation.

Strengthen partnerships in all interpretation and education

services. Parks have benefited and continue to benefit from their relationship with cooperating associations, friends groups, and

the National Park Foundation. Efforts to conduct business by

continuing to work with current partners and the identification of new partners should remain a priority.

Utilize cost-recovery for special interpretive programs.

All parks recognize the need for the delivery of interpretive

programs and media that are available to the public by virtue of

their tax dollar. However, many special or advanced interpretive services that require a greater time commitment, special

equipment, or that are perhaps offered at unusual times require

a more substantial commitment of resources. Parks that have

initiated cost-recovery programs or that use the 16USC la2g

authority have done so with some success. The public often expects to pay for such advanced services. The National Park

Service should clarify and embrace the use of 16USC la2g

authority and/or the cost-recovery authority to allow parks to provide advanced interpretive programs. Cost analyses can be

conducted to ensure that the programs are self-sustaining; this

will allow managers to make effective decisions about the range

of programs and experiences offered, and will provide immediate

feedback as to whether or not the programs are effective.

Embrace efforts to create a culture of philanthropy for the

national parks. The National Park Service is working closely

with the National Park Foundation and local friends groups

to seek increased philanthropic support for I&E functions. Donations are an important way people can express their stewardship for national parks. However, the American public

in general, and more specifically park visitors, may not know

they can make a donation to the national parks beyond placing contributions in donation boxes.

The National Park Service should embrace efforts by the NPS Partnership Office to raise the visibility and values of

partnerships, support the partnership council, and increase

the skills of all managers in partnerships and philanthropy.

The National Park Foundation and many friends groups have

established the capacity to cultivate individual, foundation, and

corporate donors in accordance with NPS policy, and return

the benefits of those donations directly to the national parks.

However, such partners will never be thoroughly successful until they can take advantage of the constituency of people most likely to donate—national park visitors. The mission of the National Park Foundation is to strengthen the enduring connection

between the American people and their national parks, with the end goal of increasing long-term stewardship and philanthropic

support for the parks. Interpretation and education programs are

essential in helping people develop deep, lasting connections with

their parks.

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 49
mm/....

i

• 4

_-*«

•-"-

The book collection of John Quincy Adams is part of more than 14,000 historic volumes housed in the Stone Library at Adams National Historical Park. The National Park Service museum collection con

tains over 90 million objects Systemwide that help convey the significance of the parks. NPS PHOTO
Appendix A

Director's Orders provide guidance for implementing certain aspects of NPS Management Policies, and are used as a

vehicle for updating Management Policies between publishing dates. In many cases, Director's Orders are further supplemented

by handbooks or reference manuals.

Copies of Director's Orders may be obtained

by contacting the NPS Office of Policy or the appropriate NPS program office, or by

accessing the NPS World Wide Web site at http://www.nps.gov/refdesk/policies.html.

Please note that the numbers assigned to some of the Director's Orders on this list may

be revised as the Directives system evolves

in the future. A status chart at the web site should be consulted for the most current

listing of Director's Orders.

Director's Orders

1. National Park Service Directives System

2. Park Planning

3. Delegation of Authority*

4. Diving Management

5. Paper and Electronic Communications

6. Interpretation*

7. Volunteers in Parks*

8. Budget and Programming*

9. Law Enforcement Program

10A. Design and Construction Drawings*

10B. Drawing and Map Numbers*

11. Information Management*

12. Conservation Planning and

Environmental Impact Analysis

13. Environmental Leadership*

14. (reserved)

15. NPS Wireless Spectrum Management

16A. Reasonable Accommodation for Applicants and Employees with Disabilities 16B. Diversity in the Workplace*

16C. Discrimination Complaints Process*

17. National Park Service Tourism

18. Wildland Fire Management

19. Records Management*

20. Agreements

21. Donations and Fundraising

22. Fee Collection*

23. (reserved)

24. NPS Museum Collections Management

25. Land Protection*

26. Youth Programs*

27. Challenge Cost-share Program*

28. Cultural Resource Management

29. Ethnography Program*

30A. Hazard and Solid Waste Management*

30B. Hazardous Spill Response*

30C. Damage Assessments*

31. Travel Procedures*

32. Cooperating Associations

33. Archeology*

34. (reserved) 35A. Sale or Lease of Park Services, Resources, or Water in Support of Activities Outside the Boundaries of National Park Areas

35B. Sale of Park Utility Services to Support

Activities Within the Boundaries of National

Park Areas*

36. Housing Management*

37. Home Businesses in Parks*

38. Real Property Leasing*

39. (reserved)

40. Dams and Appurtenant Works*

41. Wilderness Preservation & Management

42. Accessibility for Visitors with Disabilities 43. Uniform Program

44. Personal Property Management

45-1. National Scenic and Historic Trails* 46. Wild and Scenic Rivers*

47. SoundScape Preservation and Noise Management

48A. Concession Management*

48B. Commercial Use Authorizations*

49. (reserved) 50A. Workers' Compensation

Case Management

50B. Occupational Safety and Health

50C. Visitor Safety*

51. Emergency Medical Services* 52A. Communicating the NPS Mission

52B. Graphic Design Standards*

52C. Park Signs* 52D. Use of the Arrowhead Symbol*

53. Special Park Uses

54. Management Accountability*

55. (reserved)

56. International Affairs*

57. Occupational Medical Standards, Health and Fitness

58. Structural Fire Management

59. (reserved)

60. Aviation Management*

61. National Cemeteries*

62. Property Acquisition*

63. Geographic Names*

64. Commemorative Works and Plaques*

65. Explosives Use and Blasting Safety

66. Freedom of Information Act and

Protected Resource Information*

67. Copyright and Trademarks*

68. Notification Protocol For Conduct of Employee Investigations

69. Serving on Boards of Directors*

70. Internet and Intranet Publishing

71 A. Relationships with American Indians and Alaska Natives*

71 B. Indian Sacred Sites*

72. (reserved)

73. (reserved)

74. Studies and Collecting*

75. Media Relations*

76. Legislative Affairs Program*

77- 1. Wetland Protection

77- 2. Floodplain Management

77- 3. Domestic and Feral Livestock Management*

77- 4. Substances Used for Wildlife Management and Research

77- 5. (reserved) 77- 6. (reserved) 77- 7. Integrated Pest Management

77- 8. Endangered Species

77- 9. In- park Borrow Material

78. Social Science*

79. Relocation Policies and Procedures*

80. Facility Management Program*

81. Maintenance Management Program*

82. Public Use Reporting*

83. Public Health

84. Library Resources*

85. Garnishments and Levies*

86. (reserved) 87A. Park Roads and Parkways*

87B. Alternative Transportation Systems*

87C. Transportation System Funding*

87D. Non- NPS Federal Aid Roads

88. Preparing Administrative Records*

89. Space Management*

90. Value Analysis*

91. Advisory Boards and Commissions*

92. Human Resources*

93. Conflict Resolution*

94. Appeals and Hearings*

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 51
Interpretation and Education Business Plan Survey

These questions comprise a web-based survey organized in 2005 by the National Education

Council to obtain information from

individual park units and draw conclusions

for nationwide assessment. The online survey was delivered by Zoomerang, Copyright

©1999-2005, MarketTools, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Greetings! You have been selected to

participate in a survey organized by the

National Education Council under the

leadership of Associate Director Chris Jarvi and the Accounting Operation Center (AOC) National Business Plan effort that is chaired by Bruce Sheaffer, NPS Comptroller.

The purpose of this survey is to obtain information from individual park units and draw conclusions for nationwide

assessment. Responses from this survey will be used to complete the first business plan

for a national program, Interpretation and

Education. To maintain accuracy, future contact may be necessary, so please ensure

that both a correct phone number and e- mail address are included in the survey.

The survey is web-based, contains 49

questions, and will take approximately 45

minutes to complete. Please report as you would for the Servicewide Interpretive

Report (SIR). After completing each page

and selecting the "submit" button at the bottom of the page, survey results are saved. Survey respondents therefore have the

option of stopping the survey at any time, and resuming at a later date by returning to the weblink in the survey e-mail. You will be brought to first incomplete page.

If you are responsible for education and

interpretation program management for more than one park unit, we ask that you

complete the survey for each park. Those

persons reporting for more than one park

unit must reply to the survey e-mail to gain

access to a new survey. Send the message:

Chief of Interpretation for multiple parks. A

new weblink will then be provided for you.

Please complete the survey by August 10, 2005. If you have questions or comments,

you may contact Cherry Payne at 305-242- 7750 or e-mail her at cherry_payne@nps.gov.

Thank you for your time.

1Alpha Code: four letter park code

STAFFING

2. How many positions are in your interpretation/education organizational chart?

3. How many of those positions were filled

in FY 04?

4. How recently was the current organizational chart last approved? (1-3 months,

4-6 months, 7 month-1 year, >1 year, unknown)

5. At your park, is the Volunteer

Coordinator position within the interpre- tation division?

6. The Volunteer Coordinator position is: (collateral, formal, not applicable)

TRAINING

7. If your park conducts annual training for

interpreters please indicate, by percentages, how much training time is devoted

to each of the following areas. Your total should be 100%. Leave question blank if none apply, (a) Interpretive competencies

and skills (b) Park operations (c) Park specific subject matter and resource issues (d) Total figure from above

8. The total number of interpretive supervisors in your park is:

9. Indicate how many of your supervisors have attended the following: (a) Interpretive Operations for Frontline Supervisors (b) Interpretive Leadership

Seminar

10. How many of your interpretive supervisors are current on mandatory supervisory

training (40 hours per fiscal year)?

1 1Is interpretive training for NPS frontline

staff of other divisions offered at your

park?

12. Estimate the percentage of your inter- pretation and education employees (per- manents, term, and subject-to-furlough

employees, not seasonal) who have

attended each of the following TEL satellite training programs: (The Interpretive

Process Model, The Interpretive Analysis

Model, The Interpretive Talk, Informal

Visitor Contacts, Interpretive Writing,

Demonstrations and Other Illustrated Programs, Conducted Activities, Curriculum-based Education Programs,

Interpretive Planning, Interpretive Media,

Coaching and Training Interpreters, Interpretive Research and Resource

Liaison, Interpreting Controversy and

Multiple Points of View)

13. Estimate the percentage of your inter- pretation and education employees

(permanents, term, and subject-to-furlough employees, not seasonal) who

have attended each of the following classroom trainings at the park, regional, or national level: (The Interpretive Talk, Informal Visitor Contacts, Interpretive

Writing Demonstrations and Other

Illustrated Programs, Conducted Activities, Curriculum-based Education Programs,

Interpretive Planning, Interpretive Media,

Coaching and Training Interpreters, Interpretive Research and Resource

Liaison)

14. Estimate the percentage of your

interpretation and education sea- sonal staff who have attended each

of the following TEL satellite training programs: (The Interpretive Process Model, The Interpretive Analysis

Model, The Interpretive Talk, Informal

Visitor Contacts, Interpretive Writing,

Demonstrations and Other Illustrated Programs, Conducted Activities, Curriculum-based Education Programs,

Interpretive Planning, Interpretive Media,

Coaching and Training Interpreters, Interpretive Research and Resource

Liaison, Interpreting Controversy and

Multiple Points of View)

15. Estimate the percentage of your inter- pretation and education seasonal staff who have attended each of the following classroom trainings at the park, regional, or national level: (The Interpretive Talk, Informal Visitor Contacts, Interpretive

Writing, Demonstrations and Other

Illustrated Programs, Conducted Activities, Curriculum-based Education Programs,

Interpretive Planning, Interpretive Media,
Coaching and Training Interpreters, Interpretive Research and Resource

Liaison)

INTERPRETIVE PLANNING

16. When was your Comprehensive

Interpretive Plan (CIP) completed? (less than 5 years ago, 5 to 9 years ago, 10

to 15 years ago, over 15 years ago, not

currently developed, currently in development)

PERSONAL SERVICES AND ACTIVITIES

17. Compared to 5 years ago, visitor center hours for your park have been: {reduced, sustained [note: Adjustments, includ- ing hours reductions, are considered as sustaining hours IF the adjustments were

based on visitor demand/need and NOT

on staff availability], increased, don't know, not applicable)

18. Interpretive services in your park are being offered by (please check all that apply): (NFS staff, friends groups,

concessioners, institutes, incidental busi- ness permit holders [commercial use], Volunteers In Parks, cooperating association, not applicable, other, please specify)

19. What percentage of your interpretive

staff receives audits (peer, supervisory, video, etc.) at least once yearly?

20. Please indicate percentages for the fol- lowing groups performing interpretive

services who receive training in program

preparation and presentation. (Volunteers

In Parks, cooperating association, incidental business permit holders [commercial

use], cooperating association, other)

21. Please indicate the percentages of the

following groups, who are performing

interpretive duties, that have received

training in the NPS purpose and mission. (Volunteers In Parks, incidental business permit holders [commercial use], cooperating association, other)

22. Please indicate the percentages of the fol- lowing, who are presenting interpretive programs at your park, who are audited

at least once yearly. (Volunteers In Parks, concessioners, incidental business permit

holders [commercial use], cooperating

association, other)

23. Check all grade levels for which your park

offers curriculum-based education pro- grams: (preschool primary [k-2] elementary [3-5] middle school [6-8] high school

[9-12] college post secondary adult [e.g. Elderhostel], not applicable)

24. Does your park offer curriculum-based education programs for teacher professional development?

25. Check all age/educational attainment

levels for which your park offers interpretive programs, excluding those that are curriculum-based: (2-5 years old, 6-10

years old, 11-15 years old, 16-18 years

old, college, post secondary adult [elder

hostel], not applicable)

26. Does your park offer interpretive pro- grams, excluding those that are curricu- lum-based, for developmental^ disabled persons?

NON PERSONAL SERVICES/MEDIA

27. Please rate the item in the following

statements: Overall interpretive exhibit content at my park is: (1 Extremely Poor, 2 Below Average, 3 Average, 4 Above

Average, 5 Excellent) Overall interpretive exhibit condition at my park is: (1 Extremely Poor, 2 Below Average, 3

Average, 4 Above Average, 5 Excellent)

28. What percentage of exhibits meets NPS

graphic identity standards? (> 75%, 51

- 75%, 25 - 50%, < 25%, none, not appli- cable)

29. Does your park offer an orientation film?

30. How many orientation films does your

park have?

31. How many of those films are less than 10

years old?

32. How many of those films are closed cap- tioned for the hearing impaired?

33. How many of those films are offered in a language other than English?

34. Which of the following non-personal

media services are offered for visitor use by your park (NPS sponsored only)? (films, videos, slide programs, newspapers, site bulletins, trail guides, park brochures, audio cassette tours, CD-ROMs, other, please specify)

35. Which of the following non-personal

media devices are offered for visitor use by your park partners (incidental busi- ness permit holders [commercial use], concessioners, cooperating associations, friends groups, etc.)? Check all that apply:

(films, videos, slide programs, newspapers,

site bulletins, trail guides, park brochures,

audio cassette tours, CD-ROMs, other, please specify)

COOPERATING ASSOCIATIONS AND

FRIENDS GROUPS

36. How recently was your Scope of Sales Statement last updated? (Scope of Sales Statement: in-park review of the types

of sales items and how they address the

interpretive themes of a park)

37. In FY04, how many of the following programs were sponsored (partial or full sponsorship) by donations from friends groups? (performing arts, historical demonstrations, scientific demonstrations,

recreation, safety/skill demonstrations,

Junior Ranger program, special events, curriculum-based education programs,

other, please specify)

TECHNOLOGY AND DISTANCE LEARNING

38. Is information about your park's Junior Ranger program on your park's web

page?

39.1s information about your park's curricu- lum-based education program on your web page?

40. Check all distance learning opportunities offered by your park in the last 2 years. (teleconferences, satellite web cast, web

chats, interactive web courses, not applicable, other, please specify)

FACILITIES

41. What is the total number of facilities, such as visitor centers or contact stations.

in your park where interpretive services are offered?

42. Of the total number of facilities stated in question 41, how many of them are open

year-round and: (a) open on a daily basis

(b) open less than daily

43. Of the total number of facilities stated in question 41, how many of them are open

seasonally and: (a) open on a daily basis

(b) open less than daily

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

44.The Interpretation Division Chief is: (inter- pretive professional, other professional

[i.e. law enforcement])

45. List any proactive policies in place at your

park that promote and encourage partici- pation in the Interpretive Development

Program by front line staff:

46. Check all interpretive programs for which

your park uses Cost Recovery or 16USC

1 A2G: (performing arts, historical demonstrations, scientific demonstrations,

recreation safety/skill demonstrations,

Junior Ranger programs, special events, curriculum-based education programs, not applicable, other, please specify)

47. Do you have any additional comments

regarding your park's ability to provide

programmatic services based on current

staffing and funding?

48. Further comments:

49. Complete your contact information: (name, phone number, e-mail address)

Thank you for your participation and time. We appreciate your effort and know the

ultimate goal of making the interpretation

and education program stronger is only

accomplished when we work together. Please contact Cherry Payne by telephone at 305- 242-7751 or via e-mail at cherry_payne@nps. gov if you have further questions or comments. We look forward to sending you the

business plan at the end of the year.

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 53
Abbreviations Definition of Key Terms

Although not comprehensive, this glossary

highlights some of the key terms and

evolving concepts that are important

to understanding National Park Service management policies and principles. Further

definitions may be obtained from Director's Orders and Reference Manuals that are

either published or will soon be available. Statutory definitions can be accessed on-line

(e.g., at www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/.)

ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation AFS Administrative Finance System ANILCA Alaska National Interest Lands

Conservation Act CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CIP Comprehensive Interpretive Plan CRM Cultural Resource Management (plan) DM Department of the Interior Manual

DO Director's Order EA Environmental Assessment EFOIA/FOIA Electronic Freedom of Information/Freedom of Information Act

EIS Environmental Impact Statement ESA Endangered Species Act of 1973 FLREA Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act of 2004

FR Federal Register

FMSS Facilities Management Software System

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 GMP General Management Plan

l&E Interpretation and Education

IDP Interpretive Development Program

LPP Land Protection Plan

LRIP Longe-Range Interpretive Plan LWCF Land and Water Conservation Fund MIDS Media Inventory Database System

NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

PL Public Law RM Reference Manual

USC United States Code

VERP Visitor Experience and Resource

Protection

Accessibility— the provision of NPS pro- grams, facilities, and services in ways that

include individuals with disabilities, or makes

available to those individuals the same benefits available to persons without disabilities. See also, "universal design."

Accession— a transaction whereby a museum object or specimen is acquired for a museum collection. Accessions include gifts, exchanges, purchases, field collections, loans, and transfers.

Administrative record— the "paper trail" that documents an agency's decision-making

process and the basis for the agency's decision. It includes all materials directly or

indirectly considered by persons involved in the decision- making process. These are the documents that a judge will review to deter- mine whether the process and the resulting agency decision were proper.

Best management practices (BMPs)— practices that apply the most current means and

technologies available to not only comply

with mandatory environmental regulations, but also maintain a superior level of environ- mental performance. See also, "sustainable

practices/ principles."

Carrying capacity (visitor)— the type and

level of visitor use that can be accommodated while sustaining the desired resource and visitor experience conditions in a park.

Consultation— a discussion, conference,

or forum in which advice or information is sought or given, or information or ideas are exchanged. Consultation generally takes

place on an informal basis; formal consultation requirements for compliance with

section 106 of NHPA are published in 36 CFR

Part 800.

Cooperating associations— private, nonprofit corporations established under state law which support the educational, scientific, historical, and interpretive activities of the NPS in a variety of ways, pursuant to formal agreements with the Service.

Cultural landscape— a geographic area, including both cultural and natural resources

and the wildlife or domestic animals therein, associated with a historic event, activity, or person, or exhibiting other cultural or

esthetic values. There are four non- mutually

exclusive types of cultural landscapes: historic

sites, historic designed landscapes, historic vernacular landscapes, and ethnographic

landscapes.

Cultural resource— an aspect of a cultural system that is valued by or significantly rep- resentative of a culture, or that contains sig- nificant information about a culture. A cul- tural resource may be a tangible entity or a

cultural practice. Tangible cultural resources are categorized as districts, sites, buildings,

structures, and objects for the National

Register of Historic Places, and as archeological resources, cultural landscapes, structures, museum objects, and ethnographic resources

for NPS management purposes.

Directives system— policy guidance system

established by Director's Order #1 in 1996. The system replaces and updates guid- ance documents formerly known as NPS

Guidelines, Special Directives, and Staff

Directives. The system consists of 3 levels: Level 1 — NPS Management Policies— first overview level of the Directives system.

Level 2— Director's Orders— operational policies and procedures that supplement Level 1. Level 3— Reference Manuals and other

detailed guidance on how to implement

Service- wide policies and procedures.

Ecosystem— a system formed by the interac- tion of a community of organisms with their physical environment, considered as a unit.

Environmental assessment— a brief NEPA

document that is prepared (a) to help deter- mine whether the impact of a proposed

action or its alternatives could be significant;

(b) to aid the NPS in compliance with NEPA

by evaluating a proposal that will have no

significant impacts, but may have measurable

adverse impacts; or (c) as an evaluation of a proposal that is either not described on the

list of categorically excluded actions, or is on

the list, but exceptional circumstances apply.

Environmental impact statement— a detailed NEPA analysis document that is
prepared when a proposed action or alternatives have the potential for significant impact on the human environment.

Environmental leadership— advocating on

a personal and organizational level best management practices and the principals of sustainability, and making decisions that demonstrate a commitment to those practices and principals.

Ethnographic landscape— an area containing

a variety of natural and cultural resources

that traditionally associated people define

as heritage resources. The area may include plant and animal communities, structures, and geographic features, each with their own special local names.

Ethnographic resources— objects and places, including sites, structures, landscapes, and

natural resources, with traditional cultural meaning and value to associated peoples. Research and consultation with associated people identifies and explains the places

and things they find culturally meaningful. Ethnographic resources eligible for the

National Register of Historic Places are called traditional cultural properties.

Friends groups— many parks enjoy relation- ships with nonprofit corporations established

to raise funds and and build partnerships. At the national level, the National Park Foundation is congressionally authorized

to collaborate with the NPS and key part- ners to support a network of opportunities

for diverse people to connect with parks

through personally meaningful experiences.

Gateway community— a community that

exists in close proximity to a national park,

and whose residents and elected officials often have shared interests and concerns

regarding decisions that are made in managing the park. Gateway communities usually

offer food, lodging, and other services to park visitors. They also provide opportunities for employee housing, and a convenient

location to purchase goods and services

essential to park administration.

General management plan (GMP)— a plan

which clearly defines direction for resource

preservation and visitor use in a park, and

serves as the basic foundation for decision making. GMPs are developed with broad

public involvement.

Historic property— a district, site, building, structure, or object significant in the

history of American archeology, architecture, culture, engineering, or politics at the

national, state, or local level.

Implementation plan— a plan that focuses on how to implement an activity or project

needed to achieve a long- term goal. An

implementation plan may direct a specific project or an ongoing activity.

Management prescriptions— a planning term referring to statements about desired resource conditions and visitor experiences,

along with appropriate kinds and levels of management, use, and development for each

park area.

Mission-critical— something that is essential to the accomplishment of an organization's core responsibilities.

National Park System— the sum total of the

land and water now or hereafter administered by the Secretary of the Interior through the National Park Service for park,

monument, historic, parkway, recreational or other purposes.

Native Americans— includes American

Indians, Alaskan natives, native peoples of the Caribbean, native Hawaiians, and other

native Pacific islanders.

NEPA process— the objective analysis of a proposed action to determine the degree of

its environmental impact on the natural and

physical environment; alternatives and miti- gation that reduce that impact; and the full and candid presentation of analysis to, and

involvement of, the interested and affected

public. Required of federal agencies by the

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.

Organic Act (NPS)— the 1916 law (and

subsequent amendments) that created the

National Park Service and assigned it responsibility to manage the national parks.

Park— Any one of the hundreds of areas of

land and water administered as part of the

national park system. The term is used inter- changeably in this document with "unit," "park unit," and "park area."

Sacred sites— certain natural and cultural resources treated by American Indian tribes and Alaska natives as sacred places having

established religious meaning, and as locales of private ceremonial activities.

Stakeholder— an individual, group, or other

entity that has a strong interest in deci- sions concerning park resources and values. Stakeholders may include, for example,

recreational user groups, permittees, and

concessioners. In the broadest sense, all Americans are stakeholders in the national

parks.

Stewardship— the cultural and natural resource protection ethic of employing the most effective concepts, techniques, equip- ment, and technology to prevent, avoid, or mitigate impacts that would compromise the

integrity of park resources.

Strategic plan— a Servicewide, 5-year plan

required by GPRA (5 USC 306) in which the NPS states (1) how it plans to accomplish its mission during that time, and (2) the value

it expects to produce for the tax dollars expended. Similarly, each park, program,

or central office has its own strategic plan, which considers the Service- wide mission

plus its own particular mission. Strategic

plans serve as "performance agreements"

with the American people.

Sustainable design— design that applies the principles of ecology, economics, and

ethics to the business of creating necessary and appropriate places for people to visit, live, and work. Development that has been

sustainably designed sits lightly upon the

land, demonstrates resource efficiency, and

promotes ecological restoration and integrity, thus improving the environment, the economy, and society.

Sustainable practices/ principles— those

choices, decisions, actions and ethics that

will best achieve ecological/ biological integrity; protect qualities and functions of air, water, soil, and other aspects of the natural environment; and preserve human cultures. Sustainable practices allow for use and

enjoyment by the current generation, while

ensuring that future generations will have

the same opportunities. See also, "environ- mental leadership" and "best management

practices."

Traditional— pertains to recognizable, but

not necessarily identical, cultural patterns transmitted by a group across at least two

generations. Also applies to sites, structures,

objects, landscapes, and natural resources

associated with those patterns. Popular syn- onyms include "ancestral" and "customary."

Universal design— the design of products

and environments to be usable by all people

to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design.

Value analysis/ value engineering— an organized, multi- disciplined team effort that analyzes the functions of facilities, processes, systems, equipment, services, and supplies for the purpose of achieving essential functions

at the lowest life- cycle cost consistent with

required performance, reliability, quality, and

safety.

Visitor— defined as anyone who uses a

park's interpretive and educational services, regardless of where such use occurs (e. g., via Internet access, library, etc.).

Visitor Experience and Resource Protection (VERP) framework— a visitor carrying capacity planning process applied to determine

the desired resource and visitor experience

conditions, and used as an aid to decision- making.

Waiver (of policy)— an exemption from a

particular policy provision. A waiver may be

granted only by the Director of the National

Park Service or a higher authority (e. g., the

Secretary of the Interior).

Wilderness (area)— federal land that has been designated by Congress as a component of the national wilderness preservation

system.

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 55
Types of Authorities

Sources of NPS Guidance

Constitution— the fundamental law of the

United States.

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)— a publication that codifies the general and

permanent rules or regulations published in the Federal Register by the Executive branch departments and agencies of the federal government, and which carry the force of

law. The citation 36 CFR 1.1 refers to part 1, section 1, of title 36.

Department of the Interior Manual (DM)—

the compilation of policies, procedures,

and guidelines governing operations of the

various bureaus of the Department of the

Interior.

Executive Orders, Memoranda, or Proclamations— regulations having the force of law issued by the President of the United

States to the Executive branch of the federal government.

Federal Register— A daily publication of the National Archives and Records

Administration that updates the Code of

Federal Regulations, in which the public may

review the regulations and legal notices

issued by federal agencies. Source citations for the regulations are referred to by volume

number and page number of the Federal

Register and the date of publication (e. g., 65 FR 2984, January 19, 2000).

Public Law— A law or statute of the United

States.

Regulations— Rules or orders prescribed by

federal agencies to regulate conduct, and

published in the CFR.

Treaties— A formal agreement between two

or more nations in reference to peace, alli- ance, commerce, or other matters such as ocean, atmospheric, or living resources.

United States Code (USC)— The systematic

collection of the existing laws of the United

States, organized under 50 separate titles. The citation 16 USC 1 refers to section 1 of

title 16.

56 National Park Service
Acknowledgements

Director, National Park Service Mary A. Bomar

NPS Office of the Comptroller

Bruce Sheaffer, Comptroller

Tracy Fehl-Swartout, Program Manager,

Business Management Group

Elena Arensman, Management Analyst, Business Management Group

Business Plan Consultants

Taylor Matheson, Columbia University Ra'Shaute Ward, Rollins College, Crummer

Graduate School of Business

National Education Council Business

Plan Team

Elisa Kunz, Director of Education, Jefferson National Expansion Memorial

Marti Leicester, Associate Regional Director,

Pacific West Region (Retired) David Larsen, Training Manager for Interpretation and Education,

Stephen T. Mather Training Center Corky Mayo, Program Manager for Interpretation and Education,

Washington Office Cherry Payne, Chief of Interpretation and

Education, Everglades and Dry Tortugas

National Parks

Patti Reilly, Director, Northeast Center for Education Services, Northeast Region

Woody Smeck, Superintendent, Santa Monica

Mountains National Recreation Area

Julia Washburn, Interpretive Specialist, Conservation Studies Institute

Other Business Plan Team Members

Nancy Kaufman, Associate Director for

Partnerships, Interpretation, Education,

Volunteers, and Outdoor Recreation,

Washington Office (Retired) Dottie Marshall, Associate Regional Director

for Administration, National Capital

Region

Karen Newton, Ranger Activities Specialist, Pacific West Region

Charles Taylor, Chief of External Affairs, Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area Sam Vaughn, Chief of Interpretive Planning,

Harpers Ferry Center

Additional National Education Council Members

Craig Ackerman, Superintendent, Oregon

Caves National Monument

Marcia Blaszak, Regional Director, Alaska Region

Beth Boland, Historian, Washington Office Mary Bomar, Regional Director, Northeast Region

Megan Brokaw, Park Ranger, Wrangell-St.

Elias National Park and Preserve Gary Candeleria, Associate Regional Director, Midwest Region

Wyndeth V. Davis, Servicewide Education Program Coordinator, Washington Office

Neil DeJong, Chief of Interpretation and

Education, Intermountain Region

Lakita Edwards, Education Specialist, Harpers

Ferry Center Lynn Fonfa, Education Specialist, Golden

Gate National Recreation Area

Sheri Forbes, Chief of Interpretation &

Education, Mount Rainier National Park Loran Fraser, Chief of Policy, Washington

Office (Retired) Gayle Hazelwood, Superintendent, National

Capitol Parks East Christopher Jarvi, Associate Director for

Partnerships, Interpretation, Education,

Volunteers, and Outdoor Recreation,

Washington Office Jon Jarvis, Regional Director, Pacific West

Region

Joseph Lawler, Regional Director, National

Capital Region

Cynthia MacLeod, Superintendent, Richmond

Battlefield Park and Maggie L. Walker

National Historic Site Cicely Muldoon, Associate Regional Director,

Pacific West Region

Dom Nessi, Chief Information Officer, Washington Office Dan Ritchie, Chancellor, University of Denver

(Retired), Member of NPS Advisory

Board, Nina Roberts, Education and Outreach

Specialist, Natural Resource Program

Center (Retired) Marie Rust, Regional Director, Northeast Region (Retired), Michael Soukup, Associate Director, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science

Student Conservation Association Reginald "Flip" Hagood, Senior Vice President for Strategic Initiatives Clarissa Mendez, Special Initiatives Manager

Quincy Arnold, Diversity Resource Assistant

Interpretation and Education Program Business Plan 57
Front Cover Photos: (Top) Rocky Mountain National Park's Junior Ranger program is enhanced by sales items such as hats, patches, magnifying lenses, and rulers that are offered in the visitor center bookstore by the park's cooperating association. PHOTO nps/©michael LICHTER (Bottom Left) Effective and innovative outdoor media such as wayside exhibits at Timpanagos Cave National Monument help visitors understand

park resources. NPS PHOTO (Bottom Center) Many national parks feature cultural demonstrations such as

traditional basket weaving. NPS PHOTO (Bottom Right) Visitors to Fort Moultrie may encounter interpreters dressed in period clothing that make the Civil War era site come alive. NPS PHOTO

Back Cover Photos: (Bottom Left) Glacier National Park's widely celebrated red buses have been restored

to operate on clean-running propane fuel. NPS PHOTO (Bottom Center) A park ranger guides visitors on a tour of Lincoln Home National Historic Site, which has been restored to its 1860s appearance. NPS PHOTO

(Bottom Right) An interpretive ranger leads a school group on a journey of discovery in Canyonlands

National Park. NPS PHOTO

National Park Service The National Park Service is a bureau within the Department of the Interior. We preserve unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. We also cooperate with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and

outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world.

Fall 2006 1 Please i oer. Reduce, reuse, and pass this publication along to other readers.
^H

The National Park Service cares for special places saved by the

American people so that all may

experience our heritage.

***'-; PHi

HL&m

M

l>^ *<#*£&?

•?v'V- $5 ^awl

kii

An icon of thaNational Park Service and one of the

'world's most recognized landmarks. Old Faithful "Geyser is visited by almost three million people

on-site and more than 100 million people on line worldwide each year.

. PHQTO ©FLLIS SAWYER/FINLEY-HOUDAY FILMS
National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

3^20240

; mm

4~m

i i

HEL.

I 'iJiMililil.*.

^*&JS*S.^