Description and Access

SECTION 11: FOUNDATIONAL DESCRIPTION

Archival description is a core part of accessioning and helps establish intellectual control over materials in order to facilitate internal and external use.

BEST PRACTICE 11.1 ➤ Create an accession record for each new collection and accretion as a standard part of the accessioning workflow

Ensure that every new accession—both new collections and accretions to existing collections—receives an accession record.

As defined in the Society of American Archivists’ Dictionary of Archives Terminology, an accession record serves several important functions: it safeguards the integrity and authenticity of records, documents receipt and legal custody, facilitates internal communications, and serves as the basis for future descriptive work.

In conjunction with the collection file, the accession record serves as a summary of information about archival materials, allowing future archivists to answer key questions regarding an acquisition, including its creator and source, the scope and condition of the contents, and the reasons it was acquired. Recording knowledge about the ways the collection materials were received and accessioned in a consistent and accessible location provides a strong and scalable foundation for institutions of all sizes. Consistent practices and an accessible location where the information is stored supports access and use and ensures that staff who have questions about the materials or pursue further work on the collection have all relevant information readily at hand. If information is not documented in an accession record, it is likely that archivists will make decisions about arrangement, description, and access based on assumptions that may be inaccurate.

For guidance on the creation of accession records, refer to the Accession Record Elements.

BEST PRACTICE 11.2 ➤ Create accession records promptly after receipt of materials

Strive to accession new materials promptly and limit the amount of time a new collection or accretion is undocumented in your system of record. Implicit in this best practice is an understanding that institutional capacity dictates the meaning of “prompt” in every local context.

Prompt accessioning supports respectful and responsible stewardship, as materials remain vulnerable in their un-accessioned state. Timely accessioning also prevents the accumulation of an unmanageable accessioning backlog.

Archivists often know a great deal about a collection prior to its acquisition, and they learn more about it through the course of accessioning. Information about the archival materials’ content, context, and path to the archives should be easily understood and accessible, rather than living in one person’s memory.

GOING FURTHER 11.3 ➤ Create accession records for legacy materials not yet documented in your system of record

Accession records can be created retroactively for undocumented materials that entered the repository at some point in the past. Retrospective accessioning can be challenging due to a lack of information, such as date of receipt and provenance. There is no single method of retrospective accessioning that will fit every institution’s circumstances. When creating retrospective accession records, use all available information and research, and indicate when information is unavailable or unknown as appropriate. Local decisions about how to format or record some information may be necessary. These local decisions should be aligned with the recommendations of the Best Practices, documented, and followed consistently throughout retrospective accessioning.

External Resource: For guidance on designing a retrospective accessioning project, see Chela Scott Weber’s chapter “Retrospective Accessioning,” in Archival Accessioning, edited by Audra Eagle Yun (Society of American Archivists, 2021).

BEST PRACTICE 11.4 ➤ Apply DACS principles to archival description created during accessioning

Depending on the institution’s metadata guidelines, archivists can utilize a number of metadata schemas with appropriate field elements to assist with archival description.

Describing Archives: A Content Standard (DACS) does not specify a set of metadata elements and criteria for accession records. DACS acknowledges that archival materials can be described at many different levels and does not make recommendations about the proper level of description or description format. Instead, DACS defines “elements that are useful in creating systems for describing archival materials” and encourages archivists to make implementation decisions based on their own judgment and institutional policies and practices.

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS ➤ Strive to create a single-level description when describing materials during accessioning

DACS provides guidance for single-level description, which forms the basis for the elements of the accession record recommended in this document. For example, an institution may choose to create a catalog record with a single-level description of an archival collection or record group. Although often associated with catalog records, single-level descriptions can be incorporated into finding aids as an efficient way of alerting researchers about new collections. Using information from the accession record, the archivist can describe materials at the collection level without including a container list. Lower-priority materials, such as accessions with access and use restrictions, are potential candidates to receive single-level descriptions. For a recommended elements set, refer to Accession Record Elements.

External Resource: Refer to Chapter 1 in DACS for additional guidance on required fields based on the level of description. A simple, single-level description that may be applicable to accession records has nine required fields: reference code, name and location of the repository, title, date, extent, name of the creator(s), scope and content, conditions governing access, and languages and scripts of the materials.

GOING FURTHER 11.5 ➤ Create container lists, as well as more in-depth descriptions, as appropriate

Consider more granular description beyond a minimal element set and/or an inventory of the materials, if circumstances allow. Documenting the contents of specific boxes can potentially be sufficient for discovery and access or provide a foundation for future work on the collection. An optimal candidate for this type of additional work is an acquisition that arrives with folder titles rich in proper names or topical keywords or with a donor-supplied inventory. Balance the benefits of this additional work with the time and effort it will require.

BEST PRACTICE 11.6 ➤ Consistently document the presence of special formats in accession records

Make note of the presence of special formats in accession documentation, inventories, and finding aids. Add a location for audiovisual and born-digital materials in the collection as necessary.

This may include:

  • Creating format-specific extent notes in the accession records in an archival management system, documenting the quantity and types of each format, and any specific notes, such as the condition of the materials.

  • An inclusive narrative extent statement that notes the presence of special formats, including oversized materials and objects.

If materials are separated from the collection and routed to specialized workflows, this should be noted in the accession record. Utilize consistent, standardized terms to describe formats in accession records to assist other archivists and researchers.

External Resource: Two resources to help identify format types for audiovisual and born-digital materials are the California Audiovisual Preservation Project’s 2013 Audiovisual Formats: A Guide to Identification and the University of Texas at San Antonio Libraries’ Special Collections’ Know your Digital Storage Media. Additional resources for identifying and describing formats are found in Appendix E. Bibliography and Resources.

BEST PRACTICE 11.7 ➤ Strive to reuse existing information when describing an accession

As feasible, strive to repurpose existing information, including what is available in the collection file, when describing an accession. Examples include summarizing a donor’s or selector’s explanation of the collection’s research value or adapting a box-level inventory created by the donor as a container list.

Review pre-existing descriptions and inventories with a critical lens. Make adjustments or add contextual information to address inaccurate, harmful, or inappropriate descriptions. Dealer descriptions, for example, are documents created for the purpose of maximal profit and often contain highly laudatory descriptions of the creator.

BEST PRACTICE 11.8 ➤ Operationalize reparative description through accessioning

Approach accretions to existing collections as an opportunity to revisit legacy archival description. As information about new accretions is added, consider re-assessing and editing existing finding aids or other collection description with an eye toward inclusive language and reparative descriptive actions.

External Resource: Resources on inclusive description are available through SAA’s Description Section.

SECTION 12: STEPS TOWARD ACCESS

BEST PRACTICE 12.1 ➤ Consider description during accessioning as the foundation of an extensible processing program

Extensible processing, as defined by Daniel Santamaria, “ensures that baseline descriptions of all collections material . . . are available online as quickly as possible, with more detailed descriptive work conducted later based on user demand and assessment of the research value and state of collections. The processing work is iterative rather than linear and one size fits all.”

By creating archival description during accessioning, archivists ensure that newly acquired materials receive a baseline of intellectual control, prevent the accumulation of new backlogs, and allow for further descriptive work to be built on solid foundations.

One of the main purposes of accessioning is to provide a pathway for users to access archives. The extent of access—how and to whom this access is given—is subject to the internal policies of the institution or organization. The capacity of each institution to provide minimally described material to researchers may range in limitations, but access can be delivered in different forms. Access can appear in born-digital and digitized materials made discoverable online, in materials pulled for show-and-tell events, in finding aids, or in an internal and/or external request system that allows staff to request a box for processing or digitization, or allows patrons to conduct research in a reading room.

BEST PRACTICE 12.2 ➤ Make descriptive information about accessioned materials available to users to the broadest extent possible

At a minimum, archivists must make the materials in their care discoverable, or intellectually accessible, to the archives’ user base, however broad (the general public) or discrete (certain constituencies, stakeholders, clients, etc.) its user base may be. Ideally, an archives should make publicly available a description of its archival materials as promptly as possible, highlighting scope and contents, as well as any restrictions governing access and use.

The Best Practices recognize that the manner in which this description is served to users varies widely depending on the nature of the archives, its mission, and the sensitivity of the materials in its care. For some archives, providing intellectual access may come in the form of publishing accession records or equivalent catalog records online. For others, this may be prohibited or not feasible. Regardless, users who query an archives should expect to receive accurate information as to the existence of materials and their availability for further research.

This is in keeping with guidance from the International Council on Archives (ICA), which states in its “Principles of Access to Archives” that:

Institutions holding archives make known the existence of the archives, including the existence of closed materials, and disclose the existence of restrictions that affect access to the archives.

GOING FURTHER 12.3 ➤ Regularize “accessioning for access”

Strong archival accessioning practices result in the basic stabilization and description of collection material. Beyond minimal intellectual access, archives must have a physical access policy for accessioned materials. Ideally, repositories should provide broad access to accessioned collections whenever possible. In some cases, the work done during accessioning is sufficient to provide users with meaningful access that is safe for both people and collections. Institutions implementing minimal and iterative processing practices may find access-driven accessioning a viable option for making collections available quickly and efficiently.

In some archival contexts and situations, it may be appropriate to limit access to materials until further interventions can be taken. These interventions might include more granular processing, conservation treatments, or working with community or legal experts to inform archival description and access. When considering if access to a collection or portion of a collection should be limited, archivists must review pre-custodial documentation and agreements, the preservation and conservation needs of the physical and/or born-digital materials, and the existence of any cultural, legal, institutional, or donor-imposed restrictions. The need to fulfill user requests does not outweigh an institution’s responsibility to avoid any undue harm that access to its materials might cause to people and collections.

PreviousStabilizationNextSuccessful Accessioning Labor Practices

Last updated