SPEC Kit 314: Processing Decisions for Manuscripts &Archives · 87
None used as yet. (3 responses)
Not using any of these.
Not using these.
See above. These days we try to provide immediate online access to new acquisitions by at least putting a title record
in Archon. It is also a great way for staff to track new acquisitions and locations. We submit our collection records to
Archives Grid and Archives USA.
Software to be acquired and used in the near future.
To be determined just implementing new archives management software (Minisis).
We are beginning to use Archivists’ Toolkit. We expect little impact on processing decisions. It may improve our decision
making, as we will have better collection management information. It should also help us streamline our workflows as
we can enter information in one place that we previously had to enter in multiple databases.
We are considering and investigating the Archivists’ Toolkit.
We are experiment with Archon.
We are exploring the toolkit but implementation is problematic in relation to our workflow. Toolkit does not provide
reporting needed for ARL stats.
We are implementing Archon now.
We are just beginning to use Archivists’ Toolkit and anticipate the impact will initially slow down processing during the
initial phase of implementation, training, and revision of workflow other impacts include data entry and maintenance
for finding aids and accession records.
We are just implementing AT for accessioning manuscript collections. Although the accession records are searchable
only by our unit staff, the easily accessible information is already having an impact on intellectual access to unprocessed
collections. We will be exploring the use of AT as a preliminary or minimal processing tool to increase access to new
accessions and older unprocessed ones.
We are now in the planning stages to implement Archivists’ Toolkit in our department.
We are planning on implementing AT this summer.
We do not as yet use archival management software, though I’m interested in the Aeon software package from Atlas
Systems for managing use of all materials in Special Collections, especially registering researchers and recording uses,
permissions, copying orders, and the like.
We do not have AMS (instead we have a precariously large Access database that serves as our AMS) but are examining
the possibility of acquiring one.
We do not use any archival management software.
We do not use archival management software, though we do employ an in-house FileMaker Pro database. I cannot
think of any processing decisions that have been influenced by our use of this tool, though it simplifies and speeds up
many of our processing activities (easier to find materials, easier to update locations, easier to accession items, etc.).
We do not use archival management software. (4 responses)
We have adopted the Archivists’ Toolkit for the University Archives, which helps centralize all our accession and
None used as yet. (3 responses)
Not using any of these.
Not using these.
See above. These days we try to provide immediate online access to new acquisitions by at least putting a title record
in Archon. It is also a great way for staff to track new acquisitions and locations. We submit our collection records to
Archives Grid and Archives USA.
Software to be acquired and used in the near future.
To be determined just implementing new archives management software (Minisis).
We are beginning to use Archivists’ Toolkit. We expect little impact on processing decisions. It may improve our decision
making, as we will have better collection management information. It should also help us streamline our workflows as
we can enter information in one place that we previously had to enter in multiple databases.
We are considering and investigating the Archivists’ Toolkit.
We are experiment with Archon.
We are exploring the toolkit but implementation is problematic in relation to our workflow. Toolkit does not provide
reporting needed for ARL stats.
We are implementing Archon now.
We are just beginning to use Archivists’ Toolkit and anticipate the impact will initially slow down processing during the
initial phase of implementation, training, and revision of workflow other impacts include data entry and maintenance
for finding aids and accession records.
We are just implementing AT for accessioning manuscript collections. Although the accession records are searchable
only by our unit staff, the easily accessible information is already having an impact on intellectual access to unprocessed
collections. We will be exploring the use of AT as a preliminary or minimal processing tool to increase access to new
accessions and older unprocessed ones.
We are now in the planning stages to implement Archivists’ Toolkit in our department.
We are planning on implementing AT this summer.
We do not as yet use archival management software, though I’m interested in the Aeon software package from Atlas
Systems for managing use of all materials in Special Collections, especially registering researchers and recording uses,
permissions, copying orders, and the like.
We do not have AMS (instead we have a precariously large Access database that serves as our AMS) but are examining
the possibility of acquiring one.
We do not use any archival management software.
We do not use archival management software, though we do employ an in-house FileMaker Pro database. I cannot
think of any processing decisions that have been influenced by our use of this tool, though it simplifies and speeds up
many of our processing activities (easier to find materials, easier to update locations, easier to accession items, etc.).
We do not use archival management software. (4 responses)
We have adopted the Archivists’ Toolkit for the University Archives, which helps centralize all our accession and
