SPEC Kit 314: Processing Decisions for Manuscripts &Archives · 53
1st most important factor: 2nd most important factor: 3rd most important factor:
Response to patron demand. We try
to respond to requests immediately,
especially if there is a non-existent finding
aid.
Backlog. A continual challenge is to keep
up with our backlog and go through
unappraised collections.
Institutional priorities
Response to patrons Anticipated high demand Institutional priorities
Serious research requests for unprocessed
collections often result in processing on
demand or at least, review of boxes.
Contracts stipulating a timeframe will
override other priorities. On a lesser level,
an initial deposit with the promise of
additional materials is also a heavy factor.
Statistics and anecdotal evidence pointing
to collections needing attention because
of high use.
Size of collection dictates resource
allocation (staff, supplies).
Grant fund availability determines
processing of large manuscript
collections.
Institutional priorities apply to University
Archives processing activities.
Size: We are trying to deal with a large
backlog. We want to see progress
highlighting a number of collections, so
have processed small and medium sized
collections.
Anticipated high use: We review the
collections for research value, anticipated
use and requests.
Concurrently, we review institutional
programs and research needs.
Tax receipting -see above Anticipated high use -we try to prioritize
based on the anticipated research value
of a fonds or item.
Time commitment is also a pragmatic
factor, as we juggle smaller collections
against very large ones that require
extensive processing time.
Time -we don’t have much staff to
devote to processing, so time is a large
concern.
Size -same as above Anticipated use -if we think something
will be high use (e.g., Chancellor’s
papers) we will try to do more, more
quickly.
Time commitment, low hanging fruit
processed first, often related to size of
collections.
Availability of non-grant resources,
external financial support and/or
availability of an appropriate intern may
move a collection to the front of the line.
Institutional priorities lead to ranking a
collection relatively high and may lead to
institutional support.
Time commitment: we have few staff/
students to process so an efficient
turnaround time is essential.
Institutional priorities: collections in
subject areas of special interest to our
faculty or institution are high priority.
Use: any collections that would be of
high interest to researchers that don’t
have other obstacles would also be high
priority.
Time commitment: We have insufficient
staff to process materials from all seven
repositories.
Anticipated High Use: We do try to
prioritize materials that meet instructional
or research needs first.
We always respond to patron demands.
We are user-centered. We know which
parts of our collection are in (or will be) in
highest demand from our users.
Anticipated high use and user demand
kind of go hand in hand. See above.
With an institutional priority on
undergraduate learning and research, we
often prioritize collections that best serve
that goal over ones that don’t.
1st most important factor: 2nd most important factor: 3rd most important factor:
Response to patron demand. We try
to respond to requests immediately,
especially if there is a non-existent finding
aid.
Backlog. A continual challenge is to keep
up with our backlog and go through
unappraised collections.
Institutional priorities
Response to patrons Anticipated high demand Institutional priorities
Serious research requests for unprocessed
collections often result in processing on
demand or at least, review of boxes.
Contracts stipulating a timeframe will
override other priorities. On a lesser level,
an initial deposit with the promise of
additional materials is also a heavy factor.
Statistics and anecdotal evidence pointing
to collections needing attention because
of high use.
Size of collection dictates resource
allocation (staff, supplies).
Grant fund availability determines
processing of large manuscript
collections.
Institutional priorities apply to University
Archives processing activities.
Size: We are trying to deal with a large
backlog. We want to see progress
highlighting a number of collections, so
have processed small and medium sized
collections.
Anticipated high use: We review the
collections for research value, anticipated
use and requests.
Concurrently, we review institutional
programs and research needs.
Tax receipting -see above Anticipated high use -we try to prioritize
based on the anticipated research value
of a fonds or item.
Time commitment is also a pragmatic
factor, as we juggle smaller collections
against very large ones that require
extensive processing time.
Time -we don’t have much staff to
devote to processing, so time is a large
concern.
Size -same as above Anticipated use -if we think something
will be high use (e.g., Chancellor’s
papers) we will try to do more, more
quickly.
Time commitment, low hanging fruit
processed first, often related to size of
collections.
Availability of non-grant resources,
external financial support and/or
availability of an appropriate intern may
move a collection to the front of the line.
Institutional priorities lead to ranking a
collection relatively high and may lead to
institutional support.
Time commitment: we have few staff/
students to process so an efficient
turnaround time is essential.
Institutional priorities: collections in
subject areas of special interest to our
faculty or institution are high priority.
Use: any collections that would be of
high interest to researchers that don’t
have other obstacles would also be high
priority.
Time commitment: We have insufficient
staff to process materials from all seven
repositories.
Anticipated High Use: We do try to
prioritize materials that meet instructional
or research needs first.
We always respond to patron demands.
We are user-centered. We know which
parts of our collection are in (or will be) in
highest demand from our users.
Anticipated high use and user demand
kind of go hand in hand. See above.
With an institutional priority on
undergraduate learning and research, we
often prioritize collections that best serve
that goal over ones that don’t.
