14 · Survey Results: Executive Summary
ease in collaborating with others through and with the
digital collections.”
Given the benefits resulting from assessment, and
given critical concerns about the sustainability for
digital library collections and closely related digital
humanities/scholarship projects, the survey also col-
lected information on other ways respondents have
used assessment to sustain and grow the library’s
digital collections. Again, respondents reported a
variety of activities, with some specific to sustain-
ably growing collections (“Input from faculty have
informed decisions for digitization”), or using as-
sessment to meet immediate needs (“We have been
able to use statistics to leverage additional IT sup-
port for specific platforms”), or activities that support
broad goals for transforming research libraries. One
commenter explained that assessment “assures that
we make informed decisions about long-term com-
mitments for the creation, management, access, and
preservation of digital resources. Stakeholders from
across our organization are involved, and our process
and documents are straightforward and accessible,
which makes engaging stakeholders fairly easy, and
makes our commitments much more likely to remain
intact over time.”
In addition to using assessment activities to sus-
tain and grow collections, 24 respondents described
how evaluation of collections resulted in activities that
support the data/digital curation lifecycle. One re-
spondent stated, “Assessment data helps us make the
case that our collections are being used, that our roles
and responsibilities are necessary, and thus that the
digital curation infrastructure should be sustained
and further supported.” Respondents also explained
how assessment informed concerns on scope and
scale. One commented that assessment “has informed
the scale at which we will support various digital file
types and what workflows are needed” and another
noted the importance of assessment as a “strong impe-
tus for preservation.” Yet another commented on the
inverse, noting the need for scalable, integrated sup-
ported due to “[i]ncreased concerns regarding longer-
term sustainability of boutique websites and digital
exhibits.” One respondent noted how assessment
informed infrastructural and system decisions that
“might involve migration to more stable platforms,
re-examination of framework decisions, or updates
to interface design.”
Along with the benefits resulting from assessment,
the survey also asked respondents about challenges
encountered when assessing locally curated digital
collections and methods that were successful in over-
coming the challenges. Forty-two respondents shared
their challenges, which included many programmatic
concerns on the consistency of review frequencies and
cycles, quality and reliability of assessment methods
to return actionable data, appropriate granularity for
collecting data, communicating results to stakehold-
ers, meaningful assessment measures especially in
regards to usage, and limitations without assessment
plans. Many issues arise from a lack of a centralized,
coordinated, or strategic approach to assessment.
Staffing can also be a challenge. As one respondent
explained, “We have been so thinly staffed for so
long that assessment has taken a back burner until
things change. We would very much like to use it
more robustly.”
While many respondents reported concerns about
time pressures and limited resources, strikingly, they
also reported that creating locally curated digital col-
lections was a necessary step for assessment. One
respondent explained, “Assessment of digital collec-
tions is not a current priority. The focus is on creat-
ing content. The slow technological development of
our digital asset management system has delayed
the implementation of assessment tools as content is
still being migrated to the system. Assessment must
necessarily follow the ingestion of content.” Another
comment shows that the lack of resources is, at least
in part, a result of a lack of a defined or consistent
approach for the human or technical infrastructures:
“Staff who oversee digital collections are scattered
throughout the organization. Statistics for the repos-
itories are currently not kept in a central location.
There is no one person responsible for coordinating
assessment and outreach activities related to digital
collections.” Another respondent noted that they “Do
not have standard of practices in place or a compre-
hensive collection policy that encompasses digital
collection appropriately.” While many challenges
were reported, there were few examples of successful
methods for overcoming them. One respondent did
ease in collaborating with others through and with the
digital collections.”
Given the benefits resulting from assessment, and
given critical concerns about the sustainability for
digital library collections and closely related digital
humanities/scholarship projects, the survey also col-
lected information on other ways respondents have
used assessment to sustain and grow the library’s
digital collections. Again, respondents reported a
variety of activities, with some specific to sustain-
ably growing collections (“Input from faculty have
informed decisions for digitization”), or using as-
sessment to meet immediate needs (“We have been
able to use statistics to leverage additional IT sup-
port for specific platforms”), or activities that support
broad goals for transforming research libraries. One
commenter explained that assessment “assures that
we make informed decisions about long-term com-
mitments for the creation, management, access, and
preservation of digital resources. Stakeholders from
across our organization are involved, and our process
and documents are straightforward and accessible,
which makes engaging stakeholders fairly easy, and
makes our commitments much more likely to remain
intact over time.”
In addition to using assessment activities to sus-
tain and grow collections, 24 respondents described
how evaluation of collections resulted in activities that
support the data/digital curation lifecycle. One re-
spondent stated, “Assessment data helps us make the
case that our collections are being used, that our roles
and responsibilities are necessary, and thus that the
digital curation infrastructure should be sustained
and further supported.” Respondents also explained
how assessment informed concerns on scope and
scale. One commented that assessment “has informed
the scale at which we will support various digital file
types and what workflows are needed” and another
noted the importance of assessment as a “strong impe-
tus for preservation.” Yet another commented on the
inverse, noting the need for scalable, integrated sup-
ported due to “[i]ncreased concerns regarding longer-
term sustainability of boutique websites and digital
exhibits.” One respondent noted how assessment
informed infrastructural and system decisions that
“might involve migration to more stable platforms,
re-examination of framework decisions, or updates
to interface design.”
Along with the benefits resulting from assessment,
the survey also asked respondents about challenges
encountered when assessing locally curated digital
collections and methods that were successful in over-
coming the challenges. Forty-two respondents shared
their challenges, which included many programmatic
concerns on the consistency of review frequencies and
cycles, quality and reliability of assessment methods
to return actionable data, appropriate granularity for
collecting data, communicating results to stakehold-
ers, meaningful assessment measures especially in
regards to usage, and limitations without assessment
plans. Many issues arise from a lack of a centralized,
coordinated, or strategic approach to assessment.
Staffing can also be a challenge. As one respondent
explained, “We have been so thinly staffed for so
long that assessment has taken a back burner until
things change. We would very much like to use it
more robustly.”
While many respondents reported concerns about
time pressures and limited resources, strikingly, they
also reported that creating locally curated digital col-
lections was a necessary step for assessment. One
respondent explained, “Assessment of digital collec-
tions is not a current priority. The focus is on creat-
ing content. The slow technological development of
our digital asset management system has delayed
the implementation of assessment tools as content is
still being migrated to the system. Assessment must
necessarily follow the ingestion of content.” Another
comment shows that the lack of resources is, at least
in part, a result of a lack of a defined or consistent
approach for the human or technical infrastructures:
“Staff who oversee digital collections are scattered
throughout the organization. Statistics for the repos-
itories are currently not kept in a central location.
There is no one person responsible for coordinating
assessment and outreach activities related to digital
collections.” Another respondent noted that they “Do
not have standard of practices in place or a compre-
hensive collection policy that encompasses digital
collection appropriately.” While many challenges
were reported, there were few examples of successful
methods for overcoming them. One respondent did
