Pre-Custodial Considerations
Successful accessioning depends on the work that precedes it. The pre-custodial period is a vulnerable one: as the collection is removed from one context and prepared for another, crucial information and connections can be lost. Decisions made and information gathered during the acquisition process determine how thoroughly a collection can be accessioned.
This chapter is not meant to be an exhaustive resource on the acquisition process; rather, it addresses acquisition, appraisal, and selection as they apply to accessioning.
SECTION 3: SELECTION AND APPRAISAL
Choices about what to collect—and how those choices are documented—significantly impact whether or not collection materials can be accessioned in a timely, thorough manner. An institution’s mission statement, collection development policy, and other applicable policies serve as guiding frameworks for collecting priorities, limits, and obligations; however, professional judgment and ethics should also guide each assessment. The total cost of acquisition, stewardship, and environmental impact should be factored into the appraisal and selection of material.
External Resource: Resources such as OCLC’s Total Cost of Stewardship provide tools to understand and communicate financial costs of acquiring and maintaining collections in all formats, including born-digital materials.
BEST PRACTICE 3.1 ➤ Involve accessioning staff early in the acquisition process
Curatorial and collection-building staffing models vary across repositories. In some institutions, archivists are responsible for collection development, while in others curators or content experts make those decisions. Collaboration among selecting, accessioning, processing, and reference staff is critical to ensuring ethical collecting and efficient functioning of the repository.
BEST PRACTICE 3.2 ➤ Document collections before acquisition or packing
Collections should be documented in situ before they are packed or moved. Investment in pre-custodial selection and appraisal saves time in all future stages of the accessioning process. It aids in planning future storage, prevents the introduction of preservation or safety hazards into collections storage spaces, and serves as a reference for later processing. The more time between appraisal and accessioning, the greater the risk of losing critical information and context. Having the donor present when documenting this information is helpful, as the donor can explain the arrangement of the collection and how it evolved over time. If only a subset of the donor’s collection will be acquired, it will be especially helpful to have them on hand to ensure only the correct items are flagged for retrieval.
Photographing the collection prior to packing is also recommended. Images can vary in their usefulness as a reference source, but consider capturing the general layout of the storage area, existing labels and descriptions on containers, and oversized or otherwise distinctive items. If time constraints mean that quickly photographing a collection is the only documentation option available, plan to annotate the images to contextualize what they show.
Document any pre-custodial surveys and add this documentation to the repository’s control file. Appendix D includes a pre-acquisition collection survey that provides an example of information that should be gathered and documented during the pre-custodial stage.
BEST PRACTICE 3.3 ➤ Solicit source-provided description of potential acquisitions
Information and description provided by sources or creators are helpful in making acquisition decisions and creating archival description. Source-generated description enables archivists to better understand the original arrangement, illuminates what a creator views as most significant, supplies appropriate industry-specific terminology, provides accurate and respectful identity terms, and ensures that sensitive material can be identified.
Resource investment at the pre-custodial stage of accessioning results in more accurate description of materials to enhance accession records. Engaging pre-acquisition custodians in preparative description honors their lived experiences and creates an opportunity for them to contribute in tangibly helpful—and possibly personally rewarding or reassuring—ways. This can help to advance caregiving and relationship-building goals, while also smoothing the path ahead for efficient and accurate archival labor in the future.
Provide a sample inventory form, or a list of desired fields, to sources willing to create an inventory. Consider metadata reusability when designing forms and templates, and use formats like spreadsheets that can be edited and manipulated. Repurposing existing metadata puts description on the fast track toward discovery.
While all acquisitions benefit from pre-transfer interviews, source-provided contextual information for born-digital materials is especially critical. Ideally, a survey and appraisal of born-digital collection material should occur in the original environment of the material’s creation or use. If in-person appraisal is not possible, virtual conversations can also be effective. Virtual meetings with screen-sharing allow sources to walk archives staff through their creation, organization, and storage methods for digital material. If the source is still able to access the content on their computer, acquisitions staff may request the source generate a file tree, send screenshots, describe the material over the phone, or other creative approaches to gaining intellectual control over born-digital materials. This process also encourages source reflection on the material, decreasing the likelihood of transferring unintended files. In cases where the original creator or user of the digital material is unavailable or no longer living, interviewing close collaborators, family members, or others familiar with their work may provide insight.
BEST PRACTICE 3.4 ➤ Approach conversations about a source’s care of materials and personal digital practices with sensitivity
Interactions with a professional institution can be intimidating. Sources may feel embarrassed about the condition of their materials, perceived messiness, or storage in suboptimal environments. It’s important to honor sources as caretakers and demonstrate respect for the work they have done to preserve materials for transfer. Approach survey and appraisal conversations with diplomacy, making sure communications are judgment-free. Sources may also feel embarrassed about their lack of familiarity with digital best practices, especially when presented with questions about their personal file management. Clearly explaining the purpose of survey and appraisal questions and meeting the source at their level of technical comfort can assuage anxieties about the archivist’s inquiries and documentation.
Born-digital collections can provide unique opportunities for collaborative description with creators and communities of origin.
The relative ease of joint access to digital content may allow acquisitions staff to remotely guide further description of notable materials. Online file sharing and spreadsheet programs can facilitate this work. Commercial software programs have been designed for collaborative input in the appraisal and description process, including the Mukurtu CMS for Indigenous communities’ cultural heritage and ePADD’s appraisal module for email archives. Cooperative work can lighten the burden on processing staff to describe unfamiliar materials and build better relationships with sources and communities of origin.
BEST PRACTICE 3.5 ➤ Create a plan to treat culturally sensitive materials with culturally responsive care
Community holdings or culturally sensitive materials, such as those created by or about Indigenous Nations and peoples, must receive ethical care, even if the repository intends to return or repatriate the materials. Identify the presence of these materials as soon as possible, and determine if acquisitions or accessioning workflows require adjustments. Decisions should be guided by compliance with legal statutes and respect for community needs and cultural traditions.
External Resource: For professional best practices on the care of Indigenous materials, refer to the Protocols for Native American Archival Materials.
SECTION 4: LEGAL AGREEMENT
Securing legal title and ownership of physical property is a critical part of the acquisition and accessioning process. The lack of a clear legal title opens an institution to substantial risk and limits its ability to care for, administer, and provide access to collections. The legal agreement provides a foundation for future archival work, serving as the inflection point between what is possible and what is desired, what is practicable and what will best serve a repository’s mission. It is the most important piece of documentation that accompanies an acquisition, establishing legal transfer of physical and/or intellectual rights and outlining in clear terms the agreement between repository and donor.
BEST PRACTICE 4.1 ➤ Be clear and transparent in legal agreements about what will happen to materials after transfer
The legal agreement is an opportunity to practice an ethic of mutually informed consent between the creator, donor, or collector of an acquisition and the archivists responsible for its stewardship. Unrealized or unrealistic expectations can erode the donor-repository relationship, but outlining both the donor’s and repository’s obligations in the transfer documentation can manage those expectations on both sides. Approach every donation or purchase negotiation with the understanding that until an agreement is signed, it is not guaranteed, and with the willingness to walk away if an agreement in alignment with institutional mission and goals cannot be made.
BEST PRACTICE 4.2 ➤ Consider the expertise and insights of staff responsible for the entire archival lifecycle during the negotiation process
The acquisition of new materials is an indefinite, repository-wide obligation. Ideally, the terms of the legal agreement should be in keeping with the materials’ value to the repository’s mission and should not impose an undue administrative burden. Staff of archival repositories should work together to determine a baseline set of negotiated terms that can be met as part of normal business processes and that will result in reasonably rapid access to new materials by researchers. It may also be useful for legal counsel to determine any additional terms that may fall within or outside the bounds of a typical acquisition negotiation to meet the institution’s goals while avoiding unacceptable risk.
BEST PRACTICE 4.3 ➤ Negotiate and execute a legal agreement before materials are physically transferred to the custody of an archives
Terms of acquisition must be determined before transfer, and these terms must be clearly documented and communicated to all internal and external stakeholders. Archivists hold the greatest negotiating power before materials are transferred. Until a legal agreement is in place, it is difficult to manage, track, prove ownership, and appropriately document a new acquisition. Core archival information like provenance and chain of custody cannot be documented and made available to researchers without the open conversations that accompany a legal agreement.
BEST PRACTICE 4.4 ➤ Clearly identify restrictions
All restrictions governing researcher access and use, including identification of any restrictions requested by the donor or stipulated by the archives due to institutional policies or legal statutes (such as FERPA and HIPAA), should be identified in the legal agreement, and the reason for the restriction clearly stated. This ensures that terms of access, intellectual property status, and any other relevant promises to the donor can be accurately described in the repository’s system of record during accessioning. Restrictions must be finite and for as short a period as legally or ethically possible. Do not accept material that cannot eventually be made available to users.
BEST PRACTICE 4.5 ➤ Clearly define intellectual property rights
Negotiating the legal agreement is an opportunity to explain the realities of copyright to creators, particularly the extraordinary lengths of copyright periods in the United States and the onerousness for researchers in seeking permission for use and reuse. The copyright status of the materials, as far as it is known at the time of acquisition, should be clearly stated in the legal agreement, along with information about any plans to transfer rights in the future. This eases the accessioning archivist’s task of translating access and use terms into the system of record; gives the institution a clear directive for instructing users on copyright status; and, ultimately, helps institutions fulfill their promises to donors.
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS ➤ Consider alternative permissions agreements
Institutions may advocate for a full transfer of copyright, but the burden of rights management may not be feasible or sustainable for all institutions. If a donor wishes to transfer their intellectual property rights, the institution should consider releasing the content into the public domain to further enable access and use. The institution can also advocate that the rights holder grant the institution a nonexclusive right to authorize all uses of these materials for noncommercial research, scholarly, or other educational purposes through a Creative Commons license.
BEST PRACTICE 4.6 ➤ Advocate for reproduction and usage rights for the institution to protect and enable future work
Ensuring the use of materials by the institution through a statement of rights for reuse should be explicitly stated in the legal agreement. Regardless of the retention or conveyance of copyright by the rights holders, certain access and use activities are protected under U.S. copyright law, particularly for libraries (see 17 U.S.C. sec. 108 of the Copyright Act). Use the legal agreement as an opportunity to clearly define reuse with donors; establish usage rights to the extent necessary to preserve, steward, publicize, and promote the materials; and make the materials available for study, research, and exhibition.
BEST PRACTICE 4.7 ➤ Establish a policy for materials transferred without an agreement
Create an explicit policy for accessioning materials that are physically transferred without an agreement. In some cases—especially when intellectual property rights cannot be transferred or a collection is already in the public domain—an accompanying letter from the sender indicating their wish to donate may suffice for the repository’s purposes, but this choice should be made as a larger policy decision, and the risk of doing so should be fully considered. Maintain documentation of any efforts to locate donors and comply with abandoned property laws.
BEST PRACTICE 4.8 ➤ Have a deaccession plan
Sometimes, despite thorough appraisal efforts, collections will contain material that is outside the interest or collecting scope of the institution, or that presents storage or access challenges. Common examples include published materials, awards, and personal effects. The legal agreement should outline the institution’s process for deaccessioning out-of-scope material. It is common practice to give contributors the option to have materials returned to them, but given the long lifespan of the care of materials, it can be an administrative burden to locate creators or their heirs. Instead, inform contributors that duplicative materials or materials with low research, evidentiary, or symbolic value that the archives does not wish to retain will be responsibly discarded. If the contributor insists on having materials returned, record this within the legal agreement and set a limited timespan on this requirement, contingent upon notice of any change of address or contact information. If there is no donor to accept the deaccessioned materials, dispose of them in a responsible manner, including destruction or offering to another institution.
BORN-DIGITAL BEST PRACTICE 4.9 ➤ Include born-digital materials in legal agreements
Whether an accession is fully born-digital or a mix of physical and born-digital materials, having provisions that define what actions can and will be taken with digital materials is critical for accessioning staff to complete their work. Electronic records transferred on computer media may contain information—deleted, overwritten, or otherwise hidden—not necessarily known to the creator but potentially recoverable by the archives. The legal agreement should include explicit consent from the source for the institution to access and preserve data embedded in born-digital records, including hidden and deleted files, log files, and system files. Sources should agree that staff may need to unlock passwords or bypass encryption.
BEST PRACTICE 4.10 ➤ Establish a policy for accessioning collections on deposit
Collecting on deposit is the transfer of physical custody without title or ownership. Repositories should be mindful of the resources devoted to collections that may later be removed from their custody, balancing the costs of time and labor with their responsibilities to and relationships with creators, sources, and communities.
If an institution accepts a collection as a deposit or loan, it is imperative to have a legal deposit agreement clearly outlining the terms, including the length of the loan and eventual transformation from deposit to gift (or purchase, as the case may be)—or eventual return or transfer.
Additionally, repositories should establish and document policies for internal tracking and management of deposits, including determining whether (and how) deposited collections will be accessioned and deaccessioned. If a repository elects to accession deposits, the conditions of the deposit must be clearly conveyed in the accession record. Consider requesting that sources provide box-level inventories and store collection materials in stable containers in advance of deposit to ease the operational impact on the institution.
BEST PRACTICE 4.11 ➤ Clearly document shared stewardship arrangements
Shared stewardship or post-custodial arrangements where creators or sources retain custody of their materials (whether partially or completely) must be clearly documented prior to the transfer of original materials or surrogates. These plans should record a shared understanding of the responsibilities of all involved parties concerning access considerations, intellectual property rights, archival description, appropriate physical interventions, and perpetual cultural property rights.
The agreement should be stored in the collection file. As part of the accessioning process, the conditions of this arrangement must be clearly conveyed in the accession record.
Last updated