​Fatigued by years of a brutal civil war, divided by racial and economic strife, and fearful that immigrants were coming to take workers’ jobs, the US’s long-term prospects were far from assured in 1867. In that contentious and chaotic environment, Frederick Douglass gave an impassioned speech in Boston about “our composite nation,” arguing for the virtue of a pluralistic United States. He wisely observed: “Trust is the foundation of society. Where there is no truth, there can be no trust, and where there is no trust, there can be no society.”

We find ourselves in a similar trust crisis today, not just in the United States, but around the world. Global confidence in many institutions is at a historic low. In the US, many people have lost faith in the very pillars of American civic identity, such as the government, academia, corporations and the media. There is a sense that these institutions are inadequately responsive to the needs of many. Although 2017 showed a slight uptick in confidence in institutions, of the 14 measured in a recent Gallup poll, only three – the police, the military and small business – ranked higher than 50%.

The former director of the Queens Museum in New York, Laura Raicovich, was celebrated for her political outspokenness. “At Queens Museum, the Director Is as Political as the Art” read the headline of a New York Times profile last October. Less than four months later, Raicovich abruptly announced her resignation. “There are so many big things that art and culture have to contend with that are so wrong in the world,” she told the New York Times. “I just felt that my vision and that of the board weren’t in enough alignment to get that done.”
Raicovich presented the decision to leave as her own; the Queens Museum board later claimed that it forced her, after an independent investigation of her handling of an Israel-sponsored event found that she "knowingly misled the board". Either way, it seems clear that the board did not fully support her activism, including her closure of the museum on Donald Trump’s inauguration day, in step with calls for an “art strike” by prominent artists and critics, to hold a free protest sign-making event instead.

​When the Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) first opened its doors, it was considered a “people’s museum,” a place for the city of Oakland to celebrate the art, history, and natural sciences that shape California’s identity. We’ve maintained those deep ties to our community for nearly half a century and have been guided by the belief that when museums are truly welcoming and inclusive, they make a real difference in the lives of people as well as in the health and vitality of a community.

But do we have any proof to back up that belief? Not yet. How can we articulate that proof in a compelling way to our community of stakeholders? We’re not sure. So thus began our work to measure the social impact of the Oakland Museum of California — an exciting but daunting task. As Deputy Director of the OMCA, I lead the museum’s vision for community engagement and social impact. My colleague Johanna Jones is the Associate Director for Evaluation and Visitor Insights and my co-conspirator for this project. We don’t have the answers, but we are interested in sharing our process as we learn our way into measuring OMCA’s social impact in Oakland.