Outline for the Day

1. Outline for the Day • Building Blocks for Digital Curation Programs • Standards as Frameworks for Action • Lunch 12:00-1:00 • Use and Re-use Over Time • Sustainability, Advocacy, and Engagement • Wrap up and Evaluation There will be a break in the morning and afternoon

2. Goals for Part 4: Sustainability & Advocacy • Understand the characteristics of stages for developing sustainable digital curation programs • Investigate approaches to cost models for digital curation programs • Become familiar with approaches for demonstrating conformance with good practice • Identify the components of an outreach/advocacy program • Understand the importance of engaging specific audiences with targeted messages in any advocacy program

3. Links to Building Blocks • Conceptual frameworks • Organizational infrastructure • Technological infrastructure • Resource framework • Policy framework • Roles & responsibilities • Stakeholders • Content characteristics • Standards • Holistic workflows • Strategy & planning • Outreach & advocacy • Ongoing evaluation

4. Sustainability

5. (how) (how much) (what) Adapted from: Kenney and McGovern, 2003

6. Building Your 3-legged Stool Five Organizational Stages • Acknowledge:accepting digital curation as a shared concern • Act:initiating digital preservation projects • Consolidate:segueing from projects to programs • Institutionalize:incorporating external, rationalizing programs • Externalize:embracing collaboration and interdependency Source: Kenney and McGovern, 2003

7. Stage 1: Acknowledge Source: Kenney and McGovern, 2003

8. Stage 2: Act Source: Kenney and McGovern, 2003

9. Stage 3: Consolidate Source: Kenney and McGovern, 2003

10. Stage 4: Institutionalize Source: Kenney and McGovern, 2003

11. Stage 5: Externalize Source: Kenney and McGovern, 2003

12. Using the Stages for Sustainability • Identify steps for developing an organization’s digital (defines a maturity model) • Provide a way of communicating about digital preservation development • Enable measuring progress towards programmatic digital preservation goals • Offer a means for demonstrating continual improvement through transparency Source: Kenney and McGovern, 2003

13. Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Preservation and Access

14. Implications: NSF Report Components • Value – case for use • Incentives – beneficiaries & owners • Roles – responsibilities

15. Implications: NSF Scenarios • Scholarly discourse • Research data • Commercially owned • Collectively produced

16. BRTF Reference Model Funded by: JISC & OCLC-Research

17. LIFE Cost Model See:

19. Resource Planning Steps • Identify cost categories • Identify common cost centers • Calculate costs • Secure resources

20. Secure Resources • Get additional funding • Recover costs • Reduce expenses • Reallocate

21. Roles & responsibilities

22. Dream Team for Digital Curation legal records managers marketing metadata content specialists repository managers programmers IT DC NOTE: the Dream Team refers to the ‘67 Red Sox, of course

23. Discussion 5: Archival Scenario -- Who (what roles) do you think should be on the dream team?

24. Self assessment & audit

25. In Practice…

26. Self-Assessment and Audit • ISO 16363, 2012; ISO 16919 pending • TRAC Checklist, 2007 • Test audits since 2006 • Ten Principles, 2007 (Platter – plans to address) • Nestor (Germany) – criteria • DINI (Germany) – archive certifications • DRAMBORA (DCC, DPE) – tool • Data Seal of Approval – 16 elements

27. Role of Audit Benefits of audit (self-assessment): Uses checklist for self-assessment Includes gap analysis Produces development plan Provides evidence for stakeholders Enables transparency for DP program

28. Ten Principles 10 TDR Principles (CRL website)

29. PLATTER PLATTER for 10 Principles

30. Results of TRAC Review In completing a TRAC review, a repository may: Formalize policies Define roles and responsibilities Consider succession planning Designate funding Rationalize metadata Address preservation rights Prioritize technical developments Enable transparency

31. TRAC Review in Drupal – Background • Frame for ongoing TRAC review • Version 1.0 at ICPSR – 2007 TRAC document • Version 2.0 at MIT Libraries – ISO 16363 • Mapping TRAC 2007 to ISO TRAC • Numbering: A, B, C = 3, 4, 5, sort of… • Sub (and sub-sub) elements • Re-sequencing

32. Trusted Repositories Audit and Certification

33. Accumulate Results

34. Optional: Assign Responsibilities

35. Roles & Responsibilities

37. Organization-specific Content For each requirement: Identify role (Senior management, preservation…) Assign responsibilities (responsible, accountable…) Enter evidence (noting who said what when) Determine a compliance rating (based on evidence) Track status (individual requirements, responsibilities) Define action items (to be prioritized) - not public Add notes (anything that’s helpful) - not public

38. Self-Assessment and Audit Project Activities • Community context: consolidate documentation and monitor trends in audit and certification for digital preservation • Implementation examples: capture examples of addressing current requirements for audit and certification • Review options: identify and document examples of current repository audit options that organizations might consider • Producing guidance for conducting peer review audits Related: two test audits by Artefactual underway

39. Engagement & Advocacy

40. Engagement/Advocacy • You will need to engage a variety of stakeholders at various points in the digital content lifecycle: • Administrators/resource allocators • Content creators • Other information professionals • Content users

41. Engaging Resource Allocators • High level administrators in the organization • Heads of other departments/services • Head of your own department/service • You need to talk about • Value to the organization • Branding • Accountability • Visibility

42. Resource Allocators May Also Be • The public • Funders such as IMLS or the Mellon Foundation • Content creators • You will need to talk about • Value/impact of project/repository • Value of digital information • Ability to sustain authentic digital records.

43. Engaging Content Creators • Set mission & goals for your repository. • Have elevator speech • Envision types of content and services • Be flexible • Know your target audience. • Listen to them • Know what they value • Adjust your vision in terms of what is valuable to the community.

44. Envision Your Community • Envision your community broadly, for example • Faculty • Researchers • Administrators • Students • Staff • The public • Implement what is feasible over time • Look for providing value-added services

45. Engage Other Information Professionals Within your institution External to your institution In consortia Internationally

46. Engage Content Users Often content providers Teachers Researchers In-house Statewide; nationwide; worldwide Showing use adds value to material and encourages deposit and funding Understand the lifecycle for your materials from creation to use and reuse

47. Engagement Strategies Develop an overall marketing plan and strategy for content recruitment and support Identify target audience(s) – start easy Have a clear vision and elevator speech Brand the repository Promote, promote, promote Have dedicated staff

48. Engagement Strategies Develop strategic vision for populating IR Identify early adopters When do you engage? Plan to work with your content providers Develop information you need to exchange with content creators Develop ingest surveys Metadata generation workflow plan

49. More Considerations Targeted growth Need for strong policy framework Know what you can do for your community and contributors

50. 4Ps:Product, Price, Placement, Promotion • From Marisa Ramirez and Michael Miller, Cal Poly Library: • Know your product • Know how much it costs to contribute to your repository • How will people find your repository? • How will you publicize your repository?