The New Jersey Historical Commission (NJHC) initiated the Understanding Communities Study with the goal to better understand how New Jersey history and history organizations can be more inclusive for all. NJHC contracted RK&A for the first phase of the study to conduct focus groups with members of Hispanic and Latino communities in New Jersey. NJHC plans to expand the study to other communities in the future. The New Jersey Center for Hispanic Policy, Research and Development served as advisors in the project.
With support from NJHC partners, RK&A conducted three focus groups with
The National Building Museum contracted RK&A to conduct an evaluation Investigating Where We Live (IWWL), a long-running program that has brought together creative youth in the Washington, D.C. area every summer since 1996 to explore, document, and interpret the local built environment. The study goal was to examine program strengths and challenges to help NBM strategically plan for the program’s future.
How did we approach this study?
To hear a variety of perspectives on the program, RK&A conducted in-depth telephone interviews with a number of stakeholders with different
"Strengthening Networks, Sparking Change: Museums and Libraries as Community Catalysts" combines findings from a literature scan and input from the library, museum and community revitalization fields with case studies about the experiences and vision of museums and libraries working to spur change in their communities. It describes the complementary conceptual frameworks of social wellbeing and collective impact and explains how libraries and museums can use these concepts to partner with community-based organizations, government agencies and other cultural or educational organizations. It
Guglielmo Maglio is Manager of Exhibitions at the science centre “Città della Scienza” of Naples. With “Città della Scienza” he took part in the creation of “Decide”, which he appreciates for its ability to create an informal atmosphere favouring discussion. As concerns the involvement of scientists and policy-makers in the debate, though desirable, it sometimes may influence negatively the spontaneity of the debate among non-experts. In the participants, the main differences can be ascribed to personal experience, rather than to other factors such as age, nationality or social groups. Though