CLIMB EVERY MOUNTAIN, OPEN EVERY BOX: CONDITION SURVEYS AND STRATEGIC PRESERVATION PLANNING JENNIFER WAXMAN SENIOR MANAGER FOR PRESERVATION AND ACCESS CENTER FOR JEWISH HISTORY SAA 2012 Annual Meeting Session 201
Jun 11, 2015
CLIMB EVERY MOUNTAIN, OPEN EVERY BOX: CONDITION SURVEYS AND STRATEGIC PRESERVATION PLANNING
JENNIFER WAXMAN
SENIOR MANAGER FOR PRESERVATION AND ACCESS
CENTER FOR JEWISH HISTORY
SAA 2012 Annual Meeting Session 201
CONTEXT
• Strategic plan mandated streamlining access to unique and specialized material
• Creation of Archives Preservation Program in Preservation Department
• Creation of Preservation Archivist position (taking place of Preservation Librarian)
• Change in focus of conservation lab: 80/20, archives to circulating collection split
SO, WWMLR DO?
CONTEXT
• Perform risk assessment of repositories
• Perform condition survey (or, needs assessment) of collections
• Design and implement policy and procedures based on findings
PRECEDENT• Columbia University Mellon survey (2004),
PACSCL survey initiative, and CALIPR came before me• Determined approach: processed collections, box-level,
condition focused, mostly quantitative, some qualitative
• Literature survey easy; very little about condition surveys• Gunselman’s 2007 AA article “Assessing Preservation
Needs of Manuscript Collections with a Comprehensive Survey”
• NEDCC Preservation 101 condition worksheets• British Library National Preservation Office survey (2006)
• Evaluation of tools• Worksheets, spreadsheets, databases
• Box-level, on site processed collections (for this phase)
• Gather quantitative data on:
• condition of housing at collection, unit and material level
• condition of all formats
• Gather qualitative data on:
• overall condition of housing at collection level• condition of formats per unit• intellectual access
METHODOLOGY
Survey tool redesign
METHODOLOGY• kept collection,
unit and material level data
• kept physical condition, housing and intellectual access quality ratings
• expanded format tabs and sub-format dropdowns
• added lots of checkboxes to identify condition at unit, material level
METHODOLOGY
NYU Survey Tool and Survey Manual available here:
http://library.nyu.edu/preservation/archivespreservation
METHODOLOGY
• Staffing
• Part time students, teams of 2• Solid training: Gunselman article,
Ritzenthaler excerpts, NEDCC leaflets, NFPF Film preservation guide, A/V format introduction and inspection techniques, handling and care training, mold isolation procedures.
• Supplies
• Laptop, wifi• Pencil/paper, pH pen, tape
measure
• First step: shelf check
IMPLEMENTATION
• 971 collections, 5501 containers, 7 minutes a box
• Must review staff work periodically to ensure consistency and effectiveness of tool.
• Half way through survey, noticed rating system was fallible:
• Overall Housing Condition Rating 3 overused • Had to further refine ratings and require surveyors to
record reason for designating a collection Rating 2 or below
• Had to backtrack and change all collections from 3 to 2 with new definition in place
IMPLEMENTATION
• 42% Rating 3• housing made of
currently accepted standard mats, no failure to support
• 58% Rating 2 or below• indicates that
enclosures no longer support the items, +/- threaten safety, +/- not made of standard mats
263%
53555%
41042%
Rating 1
Rating 2
Rating 3
Rating 4
n=971
Housing Condition Rating Collection Level
FINDINGS: COLLECTION LEVEL
FINDINGS: UNIT LEVEL
1739
under-
stuffed boxes (33%)
1196 folders slumping (22%)
1049 under-stuffed boxes with slumping
folders
FINDINGS: UNIT LEVELMechanical damage: under/overstuffed, Plasti-clips
Remediation projects
• Fix under-stuffing and slumping issues with internal board supports and cylinders (discarded, rolled archival folders)
• Train students, educate about long term effects of decisions made during processing
OUTCOMES
OUTCOMES
Strategic planning
• Remediation projects and conservation treatments based on condition ratings and curatorial priority
• Training and integration of preservation actions into all phases of archival management (accessioning and processing workflows)
• Write preservation-focused grants armed with data
Electronic Media Survey
• Inconsistent descriptive practices made it very difficult to locate electronic media in already processed collections
• Simplified survey tool: Excel worksheets
• Training guides used to identifying media with Wikipedia articles about magnetic, optical and flash media
OUTCOMES