The recent Heritage Health Index Report on the condition and preservation needs of all US public collection has a particularly discouraging assessment of the ability of small organizations to live up to their stewardship responsibilities.
The study found that 81% of the items in the care of small organizations were at risk because the organizations lacked emergency plans, compared to 63% of items in medium sized organizations and 43% in large organizations. In every aspect of the study, small organizations fared the worst: condition of collections, collection environment and storage, emergency planning, security, preservation activities, funding, assessment, and accessibility by the public.
It is also interesting that the report was first proposed back in 1997 and was published late in 2005. One of the reasons for the lengthy process was the effort put into locating and securing the participation of the smallest groups. So not only did small organizations demonstrate less capability, their numbers greatly complicated the completion of the survey itself.
In the US, the belief in the value of small nonprofit organizations is widespread, and thousands of new organizations start up every month. This one report is not going to change that. But it is one piece of quantifiable evidence that small organizations are not only less capable, but actually increase our risk of losing what we most want to keep. One obvious conclusion is that it may make more sense for foundations and philanthropists to try make large organizations more responsive than it does to make small organizations more capable.