By Christina Velazquez Fidler, Jaime Henderson, Lara Michels, and Jessica Tai
Image above: associated incoming collection materials at the Bancroft Library. Photograph by Laura Michels.
The Bancroft Library is the primary special collections library at University of California, Berkeley. Bancroft Technical Services (BTS) is responsible for the technical operations of Bancroft and consists of acquisitions, cataloging, manuscripts processing, pictorial processing, born-digital, digital collections, and appraisal and accessioning. In 2023, several archivists at the Bancroft Library formed a working group to explore a shared interest in the ArchivesSpace assessment module as a survey tool for incoming collections.
Our group of archivists quickly realized that the effective use of the assessment module as a survey tool required that pre-custodial appraisal is richly documented, centrally organized, and easily accessible. To do this, we determined that we needed to establish a collaborative workflow and common tool for curators, archivists, and acquisitions staff to capture and document appraisal for incoming collections well before materials arrived at our door. We set out to design an intake form with this aim in mind.
The ability to collect and share collections information in the pre-custodial phase is particularly critical because it enables staff to make deliberate and early decisions about processing priorities and levels, space management, and preservation interventions. Our goal is to shift to proactive collections management practices and policies instead of reactive ways of working that do not always allow for the effective and efficient stewardship of materials.
Background
In a 2008 grant proposal, the Bancroft Library identified “traditional systems of arrangement and description” as the root cause of the library’s “massive” processing backlog and committed to rethinking these systems as the key to backlog reduction. The first step involved learning more about the institution’s backlog by hiring four archivists to conduct a three-year long retrospective accessioning survey of approximately 45,000 linear feet of manuscript collections. This survey, one of the notable grant-funded collections surveys undertaken in the hidden collections era, allowed Bancroft to identify around 5,000 linear feet of what were lovingly referred to as “quick kills” that could be opened with minimal processing. Over the course of the past decade, additional thousands of linear feet have been opened to researchers using minimal processing methods. Bancroft processing archivists have also committed to continuously adjusting and refining our processing policies and practices to get collections into the hands of researchers as soon as possible. We provide collection level description for all collections (which has been Bancroft practice since the mid-1990s) and work at other levels only as necessary to provide sufficient access.
Nevertheless, our backlog remains significant, with collections continuing to arrive faster than staff can process, now occupying at least 70,000 linear feet of shelving. This state is mitigated, to some extent, by our access to the library’s unprocessed collections program, which has been managed collaboratively by Bancroft’s technical and public services units since 2019. This program makes all unrestricted, unprocessed archival collections available pending preliminary review.
In a final report on the 2008-2010 survey project, Bancroft leadership stated a lesson learned was that any sustainable solution to the institutional processing backlog must combine a more structured appraisal and selection program with changes to how processing archivists work. For complex reasons relating to institutional culture and structure, this new emphasis on appraisal has, nevertheless, been much slower to develop than the focus on altering processing approaches. The kind of documented collection assessment that the 2008-2010 grant-funded survey produced did not become systematized after the project’s completion.
In 2023, the Bancroft Library’s technical services staff received a renewed directive from leadership to address the backlog. This charge, along with a growing profession-wide focus on stronger pre-custodial appraisal and enhanced accessioning, was the catalyst for the formation of our working group. Bancroft archivists’ desire for more well-documented appraisal as an essential requirement for efficient accessioning and processing has also aligned, at least to some extent, with a recent transformation in how deeds of gift and purchase agreements are drafted for Bancroft collections. Legal agreements are now negotiated and drafted not within Bancroft but by the University of California, Berkeley Library’s Office of Scholarly Communications, which has required Bancroft curators to significantly increase documentation in the pre-custodial phase.
Creating the Form
Our group wanted a form that was collaborative, iterative, and easily accessible to multiple users with varying technical comfort levels. We reached out to the archival community and received a variety of sample intake forms that inspired our first draft created in Google Forms. To better align with the pre-custodial tracking of deeds of gifts and purchase agreements, our colleagues suggested the form be integrated with a broader pre-custodial tracking spreadsheet. Our group pivoted to a spreadsheet format while still retaining the dropdown menus, checkboxes, and short and long form text boxes to provide room for curators and archivists to appraise both at the container and collection level.
Our form begins with guidelines and instructions for how to fill out specific fields, encouraging curators to document details about acquisitions during the pre-custodial and appraisal stages. Instructions, examples, and guidelines are also available throughout the form.
The General Information section solicits basic descriptive, provenance, and custodial information, along with administrative information such as the curator and collecting area assigned to the collection, acquisition type, whether the materials are additions to an already acquired collection, and whether future accruals are expected. The section focuses on custodial history, using instructions to guide the user to distinguish clearly between creator(s), donor(s), and custodian(s) of the material. Users are asked to select a checkbox indicating which scenario best describes the relationship of the donor/seller to the creation of the collection material (e.g. donor/seller is sole creator, donor/seller is one of multiple creators, or donor/seller is the collector or custodian of the materials, but had no role in their creation). Finally, a text box is available for the user to describe the chain of custody (or lack thereof) and any other information that would provide clarity about provenance.
The Extents, Material Types, Housing, and Condition section asks the user to provide information about the approximate extent of the collection, using examples to encourage accurate descriptions of how collections are housed and stored. This section provides guidance on how to approximate linear feet for pre-custodial storage scenarios such as record cartons, plastic tubs, and filing cabinets. The remainder of the form uses checkboxes to elicit more information about materials type, housing, and condition issues. For each section, a text box area is included to encourage more detailed or additional information about material type, housing, and condition. Obtaining this type of information in the pre-custodial phase is critical for accessioning archivists to prepare for and/or address scenarios such as non-standard containers, material types that should not be frozen for preservation, or condition issues that might require certain materials to be isolated or addressed upon receipt.
The Existing Arrangement and Description section includes a text box for users to identify original order, distinct series or groupings of material, or existing filing or numbering systems. It also encourages the curator to inquire about and document existing donor or vendor created lists or descriptions about the materials. Oftentimes, a good existing list can be repurposed by accessioning and processing archivists to create a preliminary catalog record and/or finding aid.
The final section, Appraisal and Value Score, includes a text box to record appraisal notes about the material. Guidelines are included to encourage appraisal that specifically considers the collection material and the quality of the documentation evidenced in the material, rather than the identity and role of the creator. The user is then asked to assign a value score (negligible, moderate, or high) for user interest, subject relevance, access restrictions, and barriers to use. Users are asked to consult the Guidelines for Efficient Archival Processing in the University of California Libraries for guidance on assigning value assessment.
Appraisal information about digital materials in collections is woven throughout the form. The extent section specifically includes a robust set of questions for digital materials expected to be a part of an incoming collection. The extent questions help to address operational capacity for digital collections including but not limited to server space, staffing for file extraction of media, and the difficulties in working with materials which have personal identifying information and privacy issues.
Next Steps
The intake form, while not yet fully adopted by the curatorial and acquisitions team, has been adopted by the accessioning staff. It is the hope of our group that the form will soon be fully implemented as a collaborative tool for all staff involved in appraisal, acquisitions, and accessioning. This will not only allow archival staff to deploy the assessment module in ArchivesSpace, but more broadly will provide much-needed contextual information for incoming collections. This is critical as archivists increasingly shift to baseline, extensible processing at the point of accessioning and also ensures sufficient documentation for those collections that, for one reason or another, cannot be opened for a number of years.
The adoption of an intake form at The Bancroft Library is part of a larger trend in galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAMs). The National Best Practices for Archival Accessioning Working Group (of which co-author Jaime Henderson is a member) is supported by the Standards Committee of the Society of American Archivists and is actively working to create a body of best practices for archival accessioning. In 2022, the group (through the auspices of the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Yale University) received an IMLS National Leadership grant to develop the first set of best practices for archival accessioning in the United States to help archives across the country strengthen and standardize their own accessioning practices.
The Bancroft Library accessioning staff and other staff members involved in the acquisition of collections, including born-digital, share many of the same needs outlined in the report. Implementing a change in practice is a heavy lift for any organization, but it is the hope of our group that this small incremental step towards early appraisal and information sharing will lead to broader discussion about operational capacity at the Bancroft Library.
Christina Velazquez Fidler is the digital archivist at the Bancroft Library at the University of California. She received her MLIS from San Jose State University in 2010. She has previous work experience as a software implementation consultant, archives assistant at the California Academy of Sciences, and as the archivist at the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology at UC Berkeley.
Jaime Henderson is an accessioning archivist with the Bancroft Library at the University of California, Berkeley. She previously was an archivist with the California Historical Society and San Diego History Center. She received her MLIS from San Jose State University in 2010.
Lara Michels has been Head of Archival Processing at the Bancroft Library since 2017. Prior to that she worked as archivist for Pacific Gas & Electric Company, project archivist at The Bancroft Library, and archivist and librarian for the Judah L. Magnes Museum and The Magnes Collection of Jewish Art and Life at UC Berkeley.
Jessica Tai is the Processing Archivist for Faculty Papers and Institutional Records at the Bancroft Library. Prior to her role at UC Berkeley, Jessica was an archivist at Yale’s Beinecke Rare Book & Manuscript Library, project archivist at UCLA Library Special Collections, and a research team member for the Community Archives Lab at UCLA.
Descriptive Notes 