SPEC Kit 314: Processing Decisions for Manuscripts &Archives · 15
Survey Questions and Responses
The SPEC survey on Processing Decisions for Manuscripts and Archives was designed by Pam Hackbart-
Dean, Director, Special Collections Research Center, Southern Illinois University Carbondale, and Elizabeth
Slomba, University Archivist, University of New Hampshire. These results are based on data submitted
by 76 of the 123 ARL member libraries (62%) by the deadline of May 8, 2009. The survey’s introductory
text and questions are reproduced below, followed by the response data and selected comments from the
respondents.
Libraries, archives, and cultural institutions hold millions of items that have never been adequately described. A 1998 ARL survey of
99 member libraries revealed that significant portions of many special collections had not yet been cataloged or processed, especially
nonprint formats. On average, 13 percent of microforms and 15 percent of printed volumes were unprocessed or uncataloged.
The figures rose to an average of 27 percent of manuscripts, 35 percent of video holdings, 36 percent of graphic materials, and 37
percent of materials in audio format. These items are all but unknown to, and unused by, the scholars these organizations aim to
serve. Ultimately, processing planning and management decisions become the essential building blocks for making these collections
accessible to patrons.
According to the Society of American Archivists’ Glossary of Archival Terminology, processing is the arrangement, description, and
housing of archival materials for storage and use by patrons. Beyond this basic definition, processing must include prioritization,
determining the levels of arrangement and description for each collection, and establishing standards and best practices. Once
selection decisions have been made, processing is the heart of any special collections or archival program.
In March 2008 The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation granted CLIR $4.27 million to create a national program to identify and
catalog hidden special collections and archives. As interest in uncovering hidden collections grows, the special collections/archival
community has been engaged in discussions about establishing guidelines or best practices to expedite getting collection materials
into the hands of users. A review of the literature on processing reveals the big picture of arrangement and description, but not
the specific details in practices or policies for processing special collections, manuscripts, or archival materials. Yet, managers and
processing staff face an array of difficult decisions in the management of materials processing. These decisions can include whether
to adopt minimal processing standards to facilitate access or item-level processing to facilitate digitization whether to use traditional
finding aids or technology-enhanced access methods how to provide training in processing and how to manage the process of
processing itself.
These challenging decisions lead to a review of the fundamentals of processing. What does it really mean to process special
collections, manuscripts, and archival materials? How are processing priorities determined? What are the steps required to make
these collections accessible and physically preserved? Ultimately, what should be the policy and best practices for processing these
materials?
Survey Questions and Responses
The SPEC survey on Processing Decisions for Manuscripts and Archives was designed by Pam Hackbart-
Dean, Director, Special Collections Research Center, Southern Illinois University Carbondale, and Elizabeth
Slomba, University Archivist, University of New Hampshire. These results are based on data submitted
by 76 of the 123 ARL member libraries (62%) by the deadline of May 8, 2009. The survey’s introductory
text and questions are reproduced below, followed by the response data and selected comments from the
respondents.
Libraries, archives, and cultural institutions hold millions of items that have never been adequately described. A 1998 ARL survey of
99 member libraries revealed that significant portions of many special collections had not yet been cataloged or processed, especially
nonprint formats. On average, 13 percent of microforms and 15 percent of printed volumes were unprocessed or uncataloged.
The figures rose to an average of 27 percent of manuscripts, 35 percent of video holdings, 36 percent of graphic materials, and 37
percent of materials in audio format. These items are all but unknown to, and unused by, the scholars these organizations aim to
serve. Ultimately, processing planning and management decisions become the essential building blocks for making these collections
accessible to patrons.
According to the Society of American Archivists’ Glossary of Archival Terminology, processing is the arrangement, description, and
housing of archival materials for storage and use by patrons. Beyond this basic definition, processing must include prioritization,
determining the levels of arrangement and description for each collection, and establishing standards and best practices. Once
selection decisions have been made, processing is the heart of any special collections or archival program.
In March 2008 The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation granted CLIR $4.27 million to create a national program to identify and
catalog hidden special collections and archives. As interest in uncovering hidden collections grows, the special collections/archival
community has been engaged in discussions about establishing guidelines or best practices to expedite getting collection materials
into the hands of users. A review of the literature on processing reveals the big picture of arrangement and description, but not
the specific details in practices or policies for processing special collections, manuscripts, or archival materials. Yet, managers and
processing staff face an array of difficult decisions in the management of materials processing. These decisions can include whether
to adopt minimal processing standards to facilitate access or item-level processing to facilitate digitization whether to use traditional
finding aids or technology-enhanced access methods how to provide training in processing and how to manage the process of
processing itself.
These challenging decisions lead to a review of the fundamentals of processing. What does it really mean to process special
collections, manuscripts, and archival materials? How are processing priorities determined? What are the steps required to make
these collections accessible and physically preserved? Ultimately, what should be the policy and best practices for processing these
materials?
