SPEC Kit 314: Processing Decisions for Manuscripts &Archives · 49
1st most important factor: 2nd most important factor: 3rd most important factor:
Donor desire for tax credit often the
stimulus for processing.
If we have grant for material this will give
priority to a fonds.
If we know the material is in demand it
will be move ahead of others.
Grant funded collections have been
processed.
Researcher demand Size of collection or segments of
collection -staff processing are multi-
tasking and have other work.
Grant funding is sought only when a
collection is high priority the availability
of that funding then makes the collection
the highest priority.
Level of anticipated use is always a
criterion for assigning processing priority.
Size of collection is far less a
consideration than the other two.
Grant funding, when available, carries
a clock. Our priorities for procuring
funding are set by research potential and
requests.
Collections we expect to be used more
highly are prioritized more highly, all
things being equal.
We occasionally — very occasionally
— agree to fast track processing upon
donor’s request, usually because it meets
other interests of ours.
High use -based on current researcher
demands and gaps in available resources.
Institutional priorities -meeting the
research needs of the faculty and meeting
the overall goals of institution.
Size -based on available funds.
High use -support of patrons and public
services staff.
Institutional priorities -support of
outreach programs and in-house
activities.
Grant funding -support for large or
complex processing projects.
If the collection is requested by patrons, it
is assigned higher priority for processing.
If the collection is very large or lacks any
arrangement and will therefore be very
time consuming to process, it is assigned
lower priority unless there is patron
demand.
If the collection is anticipated to have
high use, it is assigned higher priority for
processing.
If we anticipate that a collection will be
popular, we try to process it first.
We process smaller collections before
larger collections. Large collections
require experienced staff. Due to staff
turn-over, we don’t have the staff with
enough experience available to manage a
large processing project.
If more than one patron asks to use
a collection, we increase its priority
ranking.
If we have multiple or extensive request
to use a collection, it moves higher on the
priority list.
Staff time is limited so we attempt to
determine which collections will generate
most interest.
Institutional records would be processed
first, manuscripts from faculty and
administrators second, and the remainder
of the accessions.
In general, I need to find a source of
funding to hire temporary employees
to process collections either from the
backlog or even new acquisitions if large
in size.
If a collection is relatively small and
contained, it is often selected for
processing by interns or other temporary,
part-time workers.
Part of what motivates to spend the time
writing certain processing grant proposals
is the ability to demonstrate that many
diverse researchers want access to the
materials.
1st most important factor: 2nd most important factor: 3rd most important factor:
Donor desire for tax credit often the
stimulus for processing.
If we have grant for material this will give
priority to a fonds.
If we know the material is in demand it
will be move ahead of others.
Grant funded collections have been
processed.
Researcher demand Size of collection or segments of
collection -staff processing are multi-
tasking and have other work.
Grant funding is sought only when a
collection is high priority the availability
of that funding then makes the collection
the highest priority.
Level of anticipated use is always a
criterion for assigning processing priority.
Size of collection is far less a
consideration than the other two.
Grant funding, when available, carries
a clock. Our priorities for procuring
funding are set by research potential and
requests.
Collections we expect to be used more
highly are prioritized more highly, all
things being equal.
We occasionally — very occasionally
— agree to fast track processing upon
donor’s request, usually because it meets
other interests of ours.
High use -based on current researcher
demands and gaps in available resources.
Institutional priorities -meeting the
research needs of the faculty and meeting
the overall goals of institution.
Size -based on available funds.
High use -support of patrons and public
services staff.
Institutional priorities -support of
outreach programs and in-house
activities.
Grant funding -support for large or
complex processing projects.
If the collection is requested by patrons, it
is assigned higher priority for processing.
If the collection is very large or lacks any
arrangement and will therefore be very
time consuming to process, it is assigned
lower priority unless there is patron
demand.
If the collection is anticipated to have
high use, it is assigned higher priority for
processing.
If we anticipate that a collection will be
popular, we try to process it first.
We process smaller collections before
larger collections. Large collections
require experienced staff. Due to staff
turn-over, we don’t have the staff with
enough experience available to manage a
large processing project.
If more than one patron asks to use
a collection, we increase its priority
ranking.
If we have multiple or extensive request
to use a collection, it moves higher on the
priority list.
Staff time is limited so we attempt to
determine which collections will generate
most interest.
Institutional records would be processed
first, manuscripts from faculty and
administrators second, and the remainder
of the accessions.
In general, I need to find a source of
funding to hire temporary employees
to process collections either from the
backlog or even new acquisitions if large
in size.
If a collection is relatively small and
contained, it is often selected for
processing by interns or other temporary,
part-time workers.
Part of what motivates to spend the time
writing certain processing grant proposals
is the ability to demonstrate that many
diverse researchers want access to the
materials.
