Conclusions and recommendations
Science centres and museums
1. We
believe that the Museum Accreditation Scheme should be adapted
by separating out the dual roles that museums play in terms of
maintaining collections and in terms of the educational and public
engagement services that they provide. The funding streams could
then be separated to match so that museums would receive funding
from one stream to manage and store collections and receive funding
from another for the educational and public engagement programmes
that they run. A regime of this kind would have two key benefits.
First it would focus attention on the importance of the educational
and public engagement roles that museums play. Second, it would
open up funding streams for those institutions, like science centres,
that play a important educational and public engagement role in
society but do not receive Government support because they do
not house collections. (Paragraph 20)
2. We recommend that
the Government review the Museum Accreditation Scheme with a view
to creating a funding stream for educational and public engagement
programmes to which science centres could apply. (Paragraph 21)
Monitoring effectiveness
3. We
recommend that Ecsite-uk work with independent researchers to
develop methodologies that ensure that performance indices for
science centres are measured and collected uniformly and rigorously
across the UK, to reduce the risk of bias. (Paragraph 25)
4. We urge the Government
to take a lead and commission independent research to assess what
role science centres and other factors play in encouraging young
people to pursue STEM careers and how effectively science centres
influence public discussion and perception of scientific issues.
A number of institutions with interests in the promotion of STEM
subjects and public engagement might be willing to co-fund such
a project and we recommend that the Government identify and approach
likely parties to initiate joint commissioning of research into
science centres. (Paragraph 26)
Co-ordination
5. We
urge Ecsite-uk, on behalf of the science centre community, to
examine co-ordination and collaboration mechanisms that exist
in Scotland and internationally, with a view to implementing structural
and best practice guidance that promotes co-ordination between
science centres across the UK. Practices such as sharing exhibitions
nationally (according to specialism base) or staff regionally
(across a range of centre types) would be extremely beneficial.
Formal regional co-ordinating bodies, modelled on the Scottish
Science Centres Network, may be the best way to facilitate this.
(Paragraph 33)
6. The June 2007 departmental
reorganisation presents an opportunity for defining clear lines
of responsibility for science centres. We welcome the Minister
for Science and Innovation's offer, on behalf of DIUS, to take
responsibility for science centres.
7. We recommend that
responsibility for science centres be formally written into the
Minister's portfolio. However, we recognise that input from DCSF
and DCMS is necessary and the Minister for Science and Innovation
should ensure that decisions and assessments are co-ordinated
between all three departments. (Paragraph 36)
Funding options
8. We
agree that a Government commitment to long-term revenue support
for science centres should not be made unless independent evidence
of effectiveness is obtained. If independent research, which we
hope the Government will commission as a matter of priority, does
confirm that science centres make a positive contribution to science
education, the promotion of STEM careers and public engagement,
then we expect the Government to review its policy on long-term
funding for science centres along similar lines to museums and
galleries. We recognise that there may be an issue in whether
the differential admission prices between museums and science
centres act against Government policy of encouraging early engagement
of pupils in STEM subjects and we recommend that this be part
of the review. (Paragraph 42)
9. It is vital that
existing science centres do not disappear before the results of
research on their effectiveness is forthcoming. Therefore, we
recommend that the Government make available limited, competitively-awarded,
short-term funding to support those science centres that are struggling
financially. Criteria for selection should be devised in consultation
with the science centre community, including funders and other
partners, and should be clearly set out by the Government. (Paragraph
44)
10. We recommend that
the Government give serious consideration to a reduced rate of
VAT of 5% on admission fees to science and other educational centres,
as permitted under Article 98 of the EU Council Directive 2006/112/EC,
subject to independent research verifying the effectiveness of
science centres in achieving Government policy objectives (see
paragraph 42 above). (Paragraph 48)
11. We urge all local
authorities to offer 100% business rates relief to science centres.
(Paragraph 51)
Funding diversity
12. Science
centres should continue to focus on securing their financial stability
through diverse income streams. These should include local income
(ticket and shop sales), local support (local councils and RDAs),
corporate sponsorship (including industry involvement), charitable
donations (through Wellcome, NESTA etc.), grants (from the EU),
and central Government support. Ecsite-uk has a key role to play
in identifying best practice and helping to ensure that individual
science centres do not have to reinvent the wheel. (Paragraph
53)
| 
