NASM review

[Greg Granoff RPT]

Fred,
Our department here at HSU finished its NASM review last year.  While the NASM
visiting committee was impressed with the level of maintenance and condition of our
aged fleet, (we also have no replacement/restoration budget to speak of and have
not seen a new instrument in many years) they stopped short of suggesting any
specific remedy.  In fact, I was told that adequate functioning within standards of
accessessibility of pianos to students was their primary concern, and specifics of
maintenance/replacement were not likely to be addressed, exept perhaps as a
footnote.  Despite severe shortages of space, budgeting, etc., we passed with
flying colors.  I sympathize deeply with your efforts and wish you the most
gratifying results, but in my new found cynicism, it seems clear to me that NASM is
about curricular issues first and formost, and facility/equipment issues dead last.

Best of luck,
Greg Granoff

Fred Sturm wrote:

> My music department is undergoing NASM accreditation review this year
> (what fun for us all!) I have been lobbying my chair for some time that
> we should use this as an opportunity to try to squeeze money for new
> piano purchase out of the university (the department will never have an
> adequate budget, and we've bought a total of two pianos in my 15 years
> here). So, of course, the chair asked me to write an evaluation of the
> piano situation.
>         I thought I'd share an outline of what I did in case it might be useful
> for others involved in the same.
>
> I) Current condition
> A) Inventory: I described the number and type of piano owned by the
> department in some detail, including dates of purchase. (As in many
> universities, most of our inventory was purchased when the building was
> built, over 35 years ago). I opined that the types, numbers, quality
> level and models of pianos we have are generally appropriate to a music
> department of our size and type.
> B) Condition of inventory: I restated in general terms the age of our
> inventory - average age of grands, average age of uprights, % over x
> years old. I noted how many (very few) had had any degree of
> rebuilding/replacement of parts. I opined that the general condition of
> the pianos was far below acceptable standards for a music department of
> our size and type.
> C) Personnel: I described my workload as a ratio of pianos per FTE (80
> for .5 FTE = 160 per 1 FTE). I compared that with the Steinway
> Guidelines recommendation (40/FTE), the CAUT Guidelines (60 to 80/FTE),
> and the results of the CAUT 1990 and 2000 surveys (90 - 95/FTE).
> D) Humidity: I described the range of humidity in the building, noted
> the size of changes I have measured within a 24 hour period. I described
> the affects of this instability of tuning and on deterioration of
> instruments.
> II) Recommendations
> A) I recommended instituting a regular replacement budget. I proposed as
> a goal arriving at and maintaining an average age for uprights of 20
> years, with a maximum of 40. For grands I recommended an average age of
> 30, maximum of 60, with an additional budget for periodic parts
> replacement. I crunched figures and came up with an annual budget to
> arrive at and maintain these average ages. (Pretty easy. Take the total
> replacement value of the upright inventory. Double the target average
> age. Divide this number into the total replacement value. Similarly for
> grands, but I added a budget for parts).
> B) Personnel: I recommended increasing my half time position to full
> time. Alternately, I suggested hiring contract technicians to do
> practice room tuning and/or contracting out some rebuilding.
> C) Humidity: I recommended including some degree of humidity control in
> any future upgrade of the building's HVAC system. Alternately, I
> recommended budgeting for humidity control systems to be installed in
> many of the pianos.
>
>         So there you have it. Hope it's of some use to one or more. Wish me
> luck (the most I'm really hoping for is a one time, fairly major
> replacement budget. But who knows?)
> Regards,
> Fred Sturm
> University of New Mexico