Log in


  • December 04, 2018 2:14 PM | Office IFCPP (Administrator)

    Reposted from Allied Universal

    Business owners and managers have openly expressed concerns regarding property crime and physical damage to buildings and corporate campuses. Rightly so, as the 2017 Freedonia Report states that property crime accounted for 87 percent of all reported crimes in the U.S. in 2015. 

    Graffiti, broken windows and doors, theft and property defacement are not only unsightly and a nuisance, but also create fear and unease in employees and visitors. Often times, areas with property crime also experience personal theft. 

    Property and personal crimes can have a ripple effect, impacting neighboring businesses and buildings, inviting criminal activity, decreasing property value and business traffic, and having an overall impact on brand reputation.

    Unfortunately, every business or public agency is vulnerable to property crime, but working with your security provider to implement the following three steps, you will be better prepared to protect your assets:

    1. Identify weaknesses

    • Is your business located in a high-crime area?

    • Are neighboring businesses having similar issues?

    • Does your business or building take part in controversial issues?

    • Does your business have a variety of guests/employees?

    • Do you lack physical barriers?

    2. Implement solutions

    • Increase security patrols.

    • Update lighting, barriers and landscaping.

    • Integrate your physical security presence with technology solutions.

    • Utilize access control measures.

    3. Execute response

    • Develop preventive measures for deterring vandals and thieves.

    • Involve the community and neighboring businesses in your planning.

    • Promptly communicate issues to law enforcement.

    • Track crime trends.

    Make the commitment to prevent property crime before your business is adversely impacted. Above and beyond the occasional graffiti and petty theft, these criminal activity can escalate quickly and impact the entire community. 

    See Original Post

  • December 04, 2018 2:10 PM | Office IFCPP (Administrator)

    Reposted from Allied Universal

    In less than four months, a multitude of fans, tourists and media will descend upon Atlanta for Super Bowl LIII. Whether your event is a major sports event or a Fortune 500 meeting, your business, wherever it is located, needs to be prepared with the right security measures and staff to go the distance to your goal line!  By employing the best security practices, you’ll ensure the safety of your guests and staff and prevent damage to the venue. 

    • Know the Venue and Venue Security Personnel – Every venue requires a specific on-site strategy. What are the entry and exit points? In the event of an evacuation, how would you direct the crowd to avoid panic stampeding and trampling? A contracted, private event security firm should establish a great working relationship with the in-house security team who are the true experts of this venue. Contract security should be in continual touch with the in-house team via their preferred communication method before and during the event.    
    • Communication is Key – The client manager should be communicating with the in-house security team weeks or months ahead of the special event so that client expectations are aligned. What kind of uniforms should event security wear? How often does the client want to hear from security when a problem arises? 
    • Train Staff – It’s important to identify and train staffers as quickly as possible. Schedule a familiarization site walk so that they can surveil the facility layout. Additionally, it’s smart to over staff so if there is an issue, you can call in personnel who are familiar with the venue and don’t need a lot of transition time.
    • Show Time – Prior to the day of the event, all of the logistics should have been orchestrated.  Management will have reviewed post orders with the security officers, the staff is trained and all emergency planning has been finalized. 

    Also, event security needs to work closely with the local police department because every event experience is unique and it’s important to establish priorities for a variety of emergency scenarios.

    See Original Post

  • December 04, 2018 1:10 PM | Office IFCPP (Administrator)

    Reposted from Hyperallergic

    On the morning of Friday, November 30, a group of community members gathered at the RISD Museum to pressure the institution to carry out measures to decolonize by restituting stolen artifacts. The demonstration was led by students, faculty, and staff from Brown University and the Rhode Island School of Design (RISD), as well as members of the local community.

    The group flooded the front entrance of the museum and announced their call to action, leading with the chant, “Heads up, RISD!” Demonstrators distributed letterpress posters which read, “Heads Up RISD. Decolonization, or Complicity? RISD, you have a decision to make.” The poster also featured an image of the main object in question at today’s demonstration: a bronze sculpture from the Kingdom of Benin.

    The RISD Museum’s possession of this artifact, one of the thousands that have been displaced all over the world, can be traced back directly to violent colonial conquest. During the Punitive Expedition of 1897, British colonists captured and plundered Benin City. They looted and relocated its artworks to Britain, and quickly traded these artifacts to Western markets. Restitution of Benin bronzes has been highlighted in recent global news, most notably by the Bénédicte Savoy and Felwine Sarr report which was released earlier this year. Just last week, the French government agreed to begin a process of complete restitution of artifacts stolen from the African continent. The RISD Museum’s possession of this Benin bronze, brought demonstrators in Providence, Rhode Island today, to call for the same action.

    Virginia Thomas, a PhD candidate at Brown, introduced the action with an acknowledgement that the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations (the state’s official name) is home to RISD, an institution which occupies Mosshassuck land (shared by Nahaganset, Pokanoket, Nipmuc, and Peqout tribal nations) and that the RISD Museum “must account for the ways in which the institution, and we as community members, continue to benefit from the dispossession of Mosshassuck from Indigenous peoples.”

    She further announced this assembly as a call-in for the museum to decolonize without delay, and addressed the intersections at which decolonization would take place: “It is with this anti-imperialist orientation and alignment with struggles for Indigenous lands and objects, Black liberation, and a free Palestine that we desire for the RISD Museum to hear our call to disown the Benin bronze from its collections.”

    The Museum told Hyperallergic in an email following today’s action:

    “The RISD Museum recognizes the looted status of the Head of a King (Oba) made by Benin royal artists in West Africa which was given to the collection in 1939. British forces sacked the Benin kingdom in 1897 in a campaign known as the Benin Punitive Expedition. Cities were burned; the reigning king, Oba Ovonranwmen, was forced into exile; and works of art and other treasures were looted. Soon after, museums and individuals throughout Europe and the United States were collecting Benin bronzes. We have initiated a process of communication with Oba Ewuare II and the National Commission for Museums and Monuments in Nigeria which has been established to address this very issue. We see this as an opportunity to confront the histories of colonialism that exist within museum collections.”

    While the museum administration is working toward decolonization, the constituency has felt disconnected from the process and was unaware of the updates before today’s action.

    Ariella Azoulay, professor of Comparative Literature and Modern Culture and Media at Brown, was one of the several speakers at today’s demonstration. She recognized the problem at an institutional level and called on individuals with ties to the RISD Museum to support the cause for restitution:

    “The Sarr & Savoy report empowers us in this demand to disown these objects … in the process of undoing colonial geographies and violence … [The report] is the proof that museum workers have the right and are capable of not incorporating, as their own, the voice of the institutions in which they work. They also have the power to leave behind and detach themselves from the institutional persona that they inhabit. The report … is the ultimate proof that those who work in museums can introduce a distance between themselves and a voice of the institution. We are here to remind museum workers that while speaking the voice of the institution, they continue to perpetuate its imperial violence.”

    “Stolen land, stolen people, stolen art,” proclaimed a chant led by a postdoctoral scholar at Brown, Christopher, who requested his last name be omitted. Christopher notes that they are not the first to do this, they are just lending their voices to the movement. We are “doing our part to push forward our practices of accountability,” he says.

    Individuals in the group took turns reading aloud their collective message. They make it clear that they “are not acting as the messenger of existing restitution claims,” and that they are acting “in solidarity with the communities who claim [restitution] by calling for a decolonial approach that goes to the root of the museum’s institutional culture.” Repeating the individual speakers before them, the group demands the museum to willingly “embrace new modes of accountability” and that “RISD respect[s] and respond[s] to these claims with no delay.” A list of demands was also announced. They can be found online.

    After the speakers were finished, the group called in the audience to join them in delivering a letter to John Smith, the museum director. They chanted, “Heads up, RISD” as they marched through the modern wing of the museum and to the narrow hallway where the administrative offices are located. After the letter was received, RISD administration told the demonstrators that they have already begun the restitution process and have communicated with the Nigerian government. The RISD Museum will report back in a couple of weeks.

    See Original Post

  • December 04, 2018 1:06 PM | Office IFCPP (Administrator)

    Reposted from The Art Newspaper

    The process of art attribution has recently come under attack from all sides. Forgery scandals seem to be rampant. Just months after a German court convicted Wolfgang Beltracchi for faking the work of such artists as Heinrich Campendonk, Max Ernst and Max Pechstein, one of America’s oldest galleries, Knoedler, ceased operations due to allegations that it had sold paintings falsely attributed to some of the leading Abstract Expressionists. This past January, a Modigliani exhibition at the Palazzo Ducale in Genoa was forced to close early when it was revealed that nearly all the works were fakes. At the same time, fear of litigation has caused foundations representing Jean-Michel Basquiat, Alexander Calder, Keith Haring, Lee Krasner, Roy Lichtenstein, Jackson Pollock and Andy Warhol to dissolve their authentication boards. Just when we need them most, art experts find themselves increasingly on the defensive.

    However, the apparent authentication crisis is not nearly so widespread as the aforementioned widely publicized cases might lead one to believe. Most forgeries enter the market at the bottom of the food chain: through flea markets, thrift shops and internet sites like eBay. These low-cost fakes are usually identified before they can enter the high-end art market. Very few forgers have the talent to create original compositions similar enough in style to a famous artist that they fool even moderately informed people, let alone experts.

    However, as the Beltrachi and Knoedler cases demonstrate, the stakes can be enormous when a forger manages to breach the art world’s established defenses. The conservation scientist James Martin, who unmasked the Knoedler fakes by proving the paintings were created with anachronistic, atypical materials, likes to compare the authentication process to a three-legged stool of connoisseurship, technical analysis and provenance. As works are systematically examined and cataloged, the stylistic nuances of individual artists become clear, and patterns of ownership also make themselves known.

    While helpful in addition to the physical evidence presented by a work of art, provenance alone is not sufficient to authenticate a work as histories are readily fabricated, and many prominent collectors have owned fakes. Similarly, the identification of pigments unknown during an artist’s lifetime may be used to expose a forgery but the presence of historically appropriate materials does not necessarily prove authenticity. While scientific testing and provenance are important, connoisseurship is the glue that binds everything together.

    Art authentication is not, and probably never will be, an exact science. This does not mean that the experts who make such judgments are incompetent or capricious. Nevertheless, we live in a world of “alternative facts”, in which everyone’s opinion is deemed equally valid, and anyone can find an “authority” to say whatever he or she wants. The current authentication crisis arises from a confluence of populist anger at the very notion of expertise, the inherent subjectivity of the authentication process, and dizzying art prices.

    See Original Post

  • December 04, 2018 12:57 PM | Office IFCPP (Administrator)

    Reposted from the Natural History Museum 

    In times of war, the Museum defiantly stayed open for as long as it could, its grounds were converted to community allotments and resident scientists put their minds to keeping troops and allies alive on foreign soil.

    During the Second World War a number of the Museum's galleries were commandeered to provide tools and training for British secret spy networks. 

    Home front

    The Museum remained open to the public throughout the First World War, sharing knowledge to help the home front. Displays were created covering gardening, pest control and foraging.

    As food shortages took their toll, carrier pigeons relaying military communications and life-saving messages from downed pilots sometimes ended up shot for pigeon pie.  

    A display of types of pigeons was created to help those at home tell the difference between ordinary wood pigeons, rock doves, stock doves and their carrier pigeon cousins

    In 1910 the Museum received a request from the War Office. A batch of army biscuits - a staple of the military diet - which had been sent to troops in South Africa and Mauritius had been infested with moths and become inedible despite being transported in hermetically sealed jars.

    John Hartley Durrant of the Zoology department was asked to investigate. He concluded that eggs must have been laid at some point between baking and packing the biscuits, with larvae developing later inside the sealed tins

    War horses

    During the First World War, British forces used over one million horses and mules to pull heavy machinery, carry supplies and provide transport.

    This proved essential for the war effort. In 1914, Lieutenant Colonel E Lloyd Williams of the 2nd London Division applied for permission for his men to visit the Museum and study the anatomy of horse specimens on display. Today, visitors can still see one of these specimens in the Mammals gallery.

    Spies in the Museum

    A British spy network called the Special Operations Executive (SOE) was formed in 1940 as a secret service under the aegis of the Minister of Economic Warfare.

    Under the cover name Inter-Services Research Bureau, its mission was 'to aid and encourage all resistance to the enemy in occupied territories'.

    Unbeknown to the public, the SOE sealed off several galleries to create a workshop and top secret demonstration room. Plasterers and carpenters prepared materials for agents in the field in a workshop at the north end of what is now the Jerwood Gallery.

    James Bond-style hardware created in the SEO workshop included innocuous-looking carvings cast in high explosive, coloured to look like wood, sandstone and porcelain and designed to be detonated by time delay. The War Office created catalogues of such devices explaining that local agents on the Eastern Front would pose as quayside hawkers and sell carvings to embarking Japanese troops. 

    One of the most curious weapons offered to agents in the catalogue of special devices and supplies was an exploding rat - literally, a rat skin filled with explosives.

    War damage

    Between September 1940 and April 1941 the Museum was hit by a number of bad air raids as the Luftwaffe targeted London, which then resumed in 1944 with the deployment of 'Doodlebugs' (V-1 flying bombs). These raids resulted in major damage to many parts of the Museum.

    See Original Post and see fantastic photographs!

  • November 20, 2018 4:54 PM | Office IFCPP (Administrator)

    IFCPP held its 19th Annual Conference, Seminar, & Exhibits October 13-17th in beautiful San Simeon, California. Rob and Steve Layne and their extraordinary staff provided fun activities outside of the conference schedule, including wine tasting at the Heart Ranch Winery and Paso Robles vineyards, networking meals, a paint party at the Cambria Pine Lodge, and tours of the Hearst Castle in San Simeon.   The pre-conference program focused on library security and included discussions of how best to protect libraries from theft and vandalism, creating marks of ownership for special collections materials, effects of fire extinguishing agents on library and archive collections, state laws regarding ejecting disruptive patrons, and balancing access and security in library special collections. The conference program was equally rich in content: drones as an emerging threat vector, fine art insurance, Detroit Institute of Art case study in emergency planning, fire suppression systems for cultural properties, security system monitoring and evaluation, customer service, conflict resolution, collaborative collection protection, role of security in slip and fall accidents, and special event security considerations.

    The highlight of the conference was the vulnerability assessment exercise performed at the Hearst Castle. District Superintendent for the California State Parks San Luis Obispo District James Grennan, our conference host, assigned attendees to four groups that would explore four of the site’s essential functions: security, fire safety, collections, and IT. Each group spent about 20 minutes with senior Hearst Castle staff who walked each group through the grounds, castle, and houses, as well as some behind-the-scenes such as the Security Command Center, the fire station, and the collections preparation and storage area. Each staff member also discussed their daily routines, concerns, and visions for improving all operational aspects. Attendees met the next day to perform a “hot wash,” led by Mr. Grennan, who discussed the feasibility of several suggestions that were offered. Such exercises are a boon to both conference attendees as well as the host because, a) they are a great way to explore how different cultural properties deploy security, fire, and emergency management best practices, b) they provide a forum to discuss how to improve existing security programs, and c) the host gets to have a fresh set of eyes review its security program.

    The IFCPP is currently planning where to celebrate its 20th conference. This excellent program is unique because it focuses solely on cultural property protection and attendees all work for or with cultural properties, which makes for engaging conversation and networking.

    Robert Carotenuto, CIPM, CPP, PCI, PSP,
    AVP, Security
    The New York Botanical Garden

  • November 20, 2018 4:46 PM | Office IFCPP (Administrator)

    Reposted from Workplace Insight

    Workers are increasingly introducing technology devices, software and other tools into the workplace without their employer’s approval, claims a new report from NextPlane that examines the extent of this growing rift and its impact on collaboration and productivity. Nearly half of professionals (46 percent) said they or their team have introduced new technology into their workplace, and despite IT attempts to remain in control, workers are not standing down, as 53 percent said they or another team have pushed back on IT or management when they tried to dictate the technology they use.

    The report also shows that 73 percent of workers say they’ve been successful in implementing their choice of tech tools. The result is growing tension between IT departments who want to remain in control of security and systems, and employees who want the freedom to choose the technologies they use to do their jobs, and are willing to go around IT to do it.

    This growing tech loyalty is leading to business professionals seeking out new tools and technology to not just do their own jobs better, but to help their teams collaborate more effectively. The majority of respondents (63 percent) expressed loyalty to the technology products they use for their job. And it doesn’t stop on an individual level — 42 percent of teams have loyalty to technology products, leading to pushback or straying from policy if the IT-mandated tools don’t mesh with established workflows.

    “IT and business professionals are struggling to find common ground when it comes to the technology used at work,” said Farzin Shahidi, CEO of NextPlane. “Legions of teams and workers are introducing their preferred tools, such as team collaboration tools like Slack and Workplace, despite corporate IT policy. This increasing lack of compliance threatens not only the productivity of employees that may be working across different platforms, but the control that IT requires to manage all of a company’s technology securely and efficiently.”

    More than one-third (38 percent) of respondents said they would be resistant to IT or management dictating which software or tools they use to do their jobs. This reflects the notion that individuals and teams believe they know how to do their jobs best and should have a say in the tools they use to do their work. In many cases, teams prevail in pushing back on IT to allow their group to use technology of their choice, with 46 percent saying IT made an exception for their team.

    Continued Shahidi: “While there are no one-size-fits-all options for all types of technology employees might bring into the workplace, federation is one possible solution that can allow companies to deploy a comprehensive and open collaboration strategy that allows multiple collaboration tools to be used within the same organization,” Shahidi said.

    See Original Post

  • November 20, 2018 4:42 PM | Office IFCPP (Administrator)

    Reposted from Xinhuanet

    A formal indictment by state prosecutors has provided the first details of one of the biggest gold heists in German history, the newspaper BILD reported on Thursday.

    BILD cited a 68-page-long document listing charges against four individuals who are believed to have stolen the "Big Maple Leaf" gold coin from the Bode-Museum in Berlin in March 2017.

    The coin weighs 100 kilograms and is valued at 3.75 million euros, a circumstance which has previously fueled wild media speculation as to how the suspected robbers managed remove it successfully from the exhibition space.

    According to the indictment, the heist was a collusion between three members of the notorious Remmo organized crime family in Berlin and Denis W., a security officer working at the museum who acted as their accomplice. Prosecutors believe that the burglars obtained crucial information about the layout of the museum in this fashion, as well as weaknesses in its security infrastructure.

    On March 27, 2017, the three Remmo family members placed a ladder against a window of the museum at 3:20 am which had been tampered with beforehand by the accomplice to enable them to break it open easily. From there, the burglars climbed into a changing room located just a few meters away from the cabinet displaying the "Big Maple Leaf". The entry was timed to coincide with a round of the duty security officer in the museum at the time, meaning that the automatic alarm system was on standby.

    Having arrived at the display of the massive gold coin with a 53-cm diameter, the three men shattered the glass and lifted the "Big Maple Leaf" back into the changing room where it was hurled out of the museum window onto the tracks of a nearby railway line. They then exited the building and crossed the Spree river flowing outside the Bode-Museum on a railway bridge before escaping with their valuable bounty in a getaway vehicle.

    Initially, investigators had few clues as to the identity of the robbers aside from video footage of three hooded individuals from a surveillance camera. However, three undercover policemen independently responded to a call for related information that the heist could be linked to the Remmo clan, a finding which was later confirmed by a DNA analysis of the ladder, ropes, adhesives and parts of an axe left at the scene of the crime.

    After the tip-off, police began to surveil the three Remmo men and their accomplice on a running basis. They soon discovered that Denis W. had undergone a remarkable transformation in his standard of living, attempting to purchase a luxury vehicle and spending 11,000 euros for a gold chain in cash amongst others.

    The four suspects were arrested by specialized police forces on July 12 last year who discovered gold traces with a purity of 99.999 percent, the same level as that of the "Big Maple Leaf" on their clothing and a Mercedes-Benz vehicle. The coin itself has never been found and is believed to have been broken up into little pieces and sold on.

    The four suspects, all of which are registered as unemployed, are currently not in police custody after being released again on bail. There is still no official date for the start of a court trial of the alleged thieves who face up to ten years in prison for their involvement in the heist. 

    See Original Post

  • November 20, 2018 4:38 PM | Office IFCPP (Administrator)

    Reposted from FleetOwner

    We’ve all seen the headlines about instances of workplace violence perpetrated by a disgruntled current or former employee.

    Speaking at a recent NationaLease meeting, Sona Ramirez, a board-certified employment lawyer at Clark Hill Strasburger, provided some detail on the size and scope of the issue:

    • The World Health Organization said that approximately six million workers worldwide were subject to physical violence while at work.
    • In the U.S., according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are approximately 500,000 incidents of workplace violence each year.
    • Over the past 14 years, on average more than 425 workers a year are killed in the U.S.
    • There were 500 workplace homicides in 2016 and shootings accounted for 79% of those homicides.

    Faced with those statistics and information on incidents in Florida, Maryland, Texas, Kansas and Virginia to name a few, business owners and managers should start paying attention to some of the behavioral characteristics associated with perpetrators of workplace violence.

    • On the job problems including inability to accept criticism and blaming others for their poor performance
    • Unexplained increase in absenteeism
    • Increased severe mood swings
    • Frequently loses temper and holds grudges
    • Talks about problems at home more frequently
    • Increase in unsolicited comments about violence, firearms and other weapons
    • Increased use of alcohol or drugs
    • Exhibits signs of depression or withdrawal

    Often times there is a precipitating event such as a traumatic event in their personal life, extreme stress, career dilemma or loss of job that triggers the act of violence.

    You need to have a crisis management plan in place to try to help prevent instances of workplace violence. This should include background checks, anti-harassment, anti-bullying and anti-retaliation policies in addition to a procedure for filing complaints.

    Ramirez told meeting attendees to be proactive in their attempt to curtail workplace violence.

    • Develop a plan in advance to respond to an observed or reported event.
    • Pay attention to threatening or inappropriate behavior.
    • Increase physical security.
    • Limit access to workplace. For example, require the use of key cards for admittance.
    • Prohibit employees from bringing weapons to work.

    It’s also important to train supervisors and workers to be alert for the warning signs, and to report incidents of threats or unusual behavior. A tip line is one way to do this.

    You also should train your employees about the way to respond to an active shooter. Ramirez suggests treating active shooting training the way you would fire or flood training. Training videos by subject matter experts are a good way to impart information and remember to keep training brief, non-alarmist and with the clear message that the goal is to keep employees safe.

    The Department of Homeland Security offers active shooter advice that includes run, hide, fight and calling 911 when it is safe to do so. You can engage the services of a security consultant who can provide site-specific training. They typically offer in person training and role-playing drills on how to respond to an active shooter. Online training is also available.

    See Original Post

  • November 20, 2018 4:27 PM | Office IFCPP (Administrator)

    Reposted from Royal Pharmaceutical Society

    The president of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) has expressed his shock following the “disgraceful” theft of the president’s chain of office from the society’s headquarters in London.

    The chain, which is engraved with the names of all past RPS presidents from between 1841 and 1968, was stolen by a lone intruder from a museum cabinet at the RPS’s London headquarters on 11 November 2018. Usually known as the ‘first president’s chain’, there is a second chain that is worn by the current president.

    The emergency services were alerted to the theft after the intruder alarm was sounded at 7am.

    Amber Butcher, facilities manager at the RPS, said the facilities team attended the site as soon as possible after the alarm to find that two doors leading into the office’s main reception area had been smashed.

    “When the police entered they saw that a museum case had been damaged and then when they looked a bit further they saw that the item was missing.”

    She added that nothing else from the RPS museum’s collection had been taken.

    The chain, which dates from 1901, is comprised of 58 18-carat gold panels.

    Ash Soni, president of the RPS, said that although the chain was insured, “things like that are irreplaceable”.

    He added: “It’s such a disgrace that it’s the [necklace that was stolen] and [it is] very odd in some ways.

    “Of all the things to take from all the various display cabinets, it’s the one thing that’s probably the most recognizable from the RPS perspective because it’s got names of [all past presidents] on it and it’s clearly something which represents the profession. It just seems peculiar.”

    Michael Bonne, head of information and facilities at the RPS, added that the police investigation is ongoing with “the primary objective” to recover the chain.

    He said: “As with any item in our museum, it is unique and special to the Society and so any loss of this kind is unfortunate and rare.”

    See Original Post




1305 Krameria, Unit H-129, Denver, CO  80220  Local: 303.322.9667
Copyright © 2015 - 2018 International Foundation for Cultural Property Protection.  All Rights Reserved