The Society of American Archivists
SAA Logo

Log in / Log out

Join SAA

Contact us


Society of
American Archivists

17 North State Street
Suite 1425
Chicago, IL 60602-3315
tel 312/606-0722
fax 312/606-0728
toll-free 866/722-7858

 

 

Society of American Archivists
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 2 4, 2010
Washington, D.C.

 

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2010

President Peter Gottlieb called the Tuesday, February 2, 2010, session to order at 8:44 a.m. Present were Vice President/President-Elect Helen Tibbo; Treasurer Aimee Felker; Executive Committee member Margery Sly; Council members Bruce Ambacher, Scott Cline, Tom Frusciano, Brenda Lawson, Deborra Richardson, Rosalye Settles, and Diane Vogt-O’Connor; and SAA Executive Director Nancy Beaumont, Publishing Director Teresa Brinati, Education Director Solveig De Sutter, Member and Technical Services Director Brian Doyle, Finance/Administration Director Tom Jurczak, and Project Assistant René Mueller.  Council member Tom Hyry was absent for the February 2 session, but present for the February 3 and 4 sessions.  Vice President Helen Tibbo departed the Council meeting at 3:00 pm on Tuesday, February 2.

Several individuals joined the group for portions of the February 2 session:  Dorothy Pirovano of Public Communications, Inc. (facilitator for public awareness planning session); Kathleen Williams (Executive Director, National Historical Publications and Records Commission); Joel Wurl (Program Officer, National Endowment for the Humanities); and Kevin Cherry (Senior Program Officer, Institute for Museum and Library Services).

I. COUNCIL BUSINESS

A.  Adoption of the Agenda 

Felker brought forward the agenda as amended by the Executive Committee. Ambacher moved and Settles seconded adoption of the agenda as amended.  PASSED (with Vogt-O’Connor and Richardson abstaining).

B.  August 2009 Minutes (Approved October 2009)

The August 2009 minutes were adopted by the Council in October 2009 and posted on the SAA website immediately. SAA members were notified of availability of the minutes via In the Loop and the website.

C.  Review of August 2009 “To Do” List

Council members reviewed the items listed on the August 2009 “To Do List,” provided updates on completed and pending action items, and agreed to remove several items from the list.

II. STRATEGIC PLANNING
           
Dorothy Pirovano (of Chicago-based Public Communications, Inc.) facilitated a four-hour strategic planning session with SAA Council members and staff to discuss the third major priority in SAA’s strategic planning document:  Public Awareness.  Pirovano led the group through a series of exercises that identified 1) key audiences to target for SAA’s public awareness messages (resource allocators and current users of archives), and 2) specific messages that may influence the thinking or behavior of the key audiences.  The Council brainstormed about tactics for transmitting the messages, including possible projects or campaigns that SAA might implement.  Gottlieb and Beaumont will draft revisions to the strategic priority document based on the planning session and will forward them to the Council for discussion. While the discussion brought forward many good ideas, the Council made no decisions regarding the Public Awareness strategic priority.

III. ACTION ITEMS
           
A.  Petition to Form Human Rights Archives Roundtable

A petition to form a Human Rights Archives Roundtable was submitted via e-mail by SAA members Valerie Love and Tiffany-Kay Sangwand on December 10, 2009. Additional materials (including the petition signed by the requisite 50 SAA members) were supplied via priority mail, received on December 14, and were included with the report.  Beaumont warranted that the requisite 50 member signatures were obtained for the petition.

MOTION 1

THAT the petition to form a Human Rights Archives Roundtable, signed by the requisite 50 SAA members and with the following Statement of Intent and Goals, be approved.

Statement of Intent

The Human Rights Archives Roundtable aims to create a space for SAA members and other stakeholders (human rights advocates, scholars, government officials, and non-governmental organization workers) to increase dialogue and collaboration on issues related to the collection, preservation, disclosure, legal implications, and ethics of human rights documentation. 

Goals

  1. To foster dialogue among archivists working with human rights collections and other stakeholders on issues related to the management of, preservation of, and access to human rights archives.
  2. To disseminate information to roundtable members and members of SAA, and to formalize grassroots organizing around human rights issues within SAA and in conjunction with the International Council on Archives Human Rights Working Group.
  3. To establish a formal presence within SAA and create an official venue for the exchange of ideas affecting human rights archives collections.
    1. Integrate the current Human Rights Archives e-mail listserv with other SAA lists.
    2. Develop a Human Rights Archives Roundtable website.
    3. Create an electronic newsletter to share news and publicize events.
  4. To facilitate collaboration and information sharing among archival institutions, universities, governments, legal bodies, and non-government agencies that are working to document and preserve records of human rights abuses.

Support Statement:  The roundtable petition meets all submission requirements for Council consideration in approving a new SAA roundtable.

Fiscal Impact:  None.  (Staff Note:  Will require additional meeting room or other space at annual meetings going forward.)

Moved by Cline; seconded by Vogt-O’Connor.  PASSED.
           
B.  Petition to Form Public Library Archives/Special Collections Roundtable
                 
A request to form a Public Library Archives/Special Collections Roundtable was submitted via e-mail by SAA member Renée DesRoberts on November 17, 2009.  She wished, if possible, to allow individuals to provide their signatures electronically.  Doyle set up such a system, and DesRoberts submitted the required documents on December 28.  Beaumont warranted that, as of January 29, 2009, the requisite 50 member signatures were obtained for the petition.

MOTION 2

THAT the petition to form a Public Library Archives/Special Collections Roundtable, signed by the requisite 50 SAA members and with the following Statement of Intent and Goals, be approved.

Statement of Intent

The Public Library Archives/Special Collections Roundtable serves to encourage advocacy for and education about archival, manuscript, local history, genealogy, and other historic and special collections within public libraries of all sizes.

Goals 

The Roundtable provides an arena for discussion and dissemination of best practices of the archives, library, museum, and history fields. It works to support the informational, historical, and cultural interests that converge in public library archives and special collections.

 

Support Statement: The roundtable petition meets all submission requirements for Council consideration in approving a new SAA roundtable.

Fiscal Impact:  None.  (Staff Note:  Will require additional meeting room or other space at annual meetings going forward.)

Moved by Vogt-O’Connor; seconded by Richardson.  PASSED.

C.  Endorsement of National Preservation Week
                 
SAA was asked to join the American Library Association (ALA), the Library of Congress, and the Institute for Museum and Library Services as a partner in celebrating the first National Preservation Week, to be launched May 9-15, 2010.  National Preservation Week will highlight the importance of preserving archival records and special collections and library, museum, personal, family, and community collections, which are core to connecting individuals to evidence, learning, information, and heritage. 

MOTION 3
 
THAT SAA join the American Library Association, the Library of Congress, and the Institute for Museum and Library Services as a partner in celebrating the first National Preservation Week, May 9 – 15, 2010; and

THAT SAA publicize its support for National Preservation Week to its members via all means possible in order to stimulate member awareness and encourage participation in preservation activities.

Support Statement:  SAA participation in National Preservation Week could provide an opportunity to expand the Society’s partnership efforts with libraries and museums nationwide, bringing SAA preservation work to appreciative new audiences.  Participation in National Preservation Week will also help archives reach out to their communities, including donors, records creators, and collectors, to provide high-quality guidance on how to care for records and special collections.

Fiscal Impact:   No fiscal impact is expected. The ALA Preservation Week website  (www.ala.org/preservationweek) will connect archivists with excellent resources already available for those who need specific preservation information, as does the existing SAA Preservation Section web page and SAA’s MayDay web page.  A National Preservation Week poster and bookmark, which already are available at  www.alastore.ala.org/detail.aspx?ID=2823, could also be used by archivists to limit their costs.

Moved by Ambacher; seconded by Cline. PASSED.

D.  Resolution Honoring Studs Terkel

SAA member Al Stein, 2008-2009 Oral History Section chair, proposed that SAA honor oral historian Studs Terkel with a Resolution. 

MOTION 4

THAT the following resolution honoring Oral Historian Louis “Studs” Terkel be adopted:

SAA Council Resolution Honoring Oral Historian

Louis “Studs” Terkel

 

WHEREAS  Louis “Studs” Terkel made outstanding contributions to archival oral history; to the National Gallery of the Spoken Word, based at Michigan State University; and to Chicago’s cultural record at the Chicago History Museum; and

WHEREAS  Sound recordings in general, and oral history recordings in particular, have established a significant and rapidly increasing presence within multimedia archives; and

WHEREAS  The Studs Terkel Center for Oral History (at the Chicago History Museum) presents both a case study and an examination of one of the country’s most important and popular oral history archives; and

WHEREAS  The SAA Oral History Section recognized Studs Terkel during SAA’s 61st Annual Meeting, August 25-31, 1997, in Chicago, and as an expression of our gratitude presented Mr. Terkel with a Certificate of Appreciation; and

WHEREAS  The SAA Oral History Section endorsed the Studs Terkel Plenary Session “Free Speech, Free Spirit: The Studs Terkel Center for Oral History” at SAA’s 71st Annual Meeting, August 28-September 2, 2007, in Chicago; and

WHEREAS  Studs Terkel’s work has been an inspiration to so many of us, and has effectively served to promote oral history and heighten the general awareness of its uniqueness and value; and

WHEREAS  Studs Terkel has given a voice to many people whose stories wouldn’t have otherwise been told and has inspired many to record those voices and preserve those stories; and

WHEREAS  This resolution will enhance appreciation for the value of the oral history process in general and for the contributions and significance of Studs Terkel’s work in the field of archival oral history; 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT  The Society of American Archivists recognizes and honors Louis “Studs” Terkel for his outstanding contributions to the field of oral history and to the archives profession by preserving the cultural record through the spoken word.

Support Statement:  Studs had the ability to narrate history orally and would help confront the issues that most oral historians deal with in terms of giving an identity to the increased popularity of oral history collections: being recognized for their own merit (as more written records are being digitized) and spotlighting archives that collect and interpret their “aural” history collections. What better way to help SAA celebrate its own anniversary than by celebrating Studs, whose life spanned the history of SAA – from Roosevelt’s New Deal to Obama’s New Era of transparency.

Moved by Felker; seconded by Sly. PASSED.

At this point in the agenda, Council members met with Kevin Cherry (Senior Program Officer, Institute for Museum and Library Services), Kathleen Williams (Executive Director, National Historical Publications and Records Commission), and Joel Wurl (Program Officer, National Endowment for the Humanities) to learn about the funding agencies’ priorities for the coming year.

E.  Chairperson of Fellows Selection Committee

The past five presidents of SAA (Frank Boles, Mark Greene, Elizabeth W. Adkins, Richard Pearce-Moses, and Rand Jimerson) proposed a change in the requirement that the second-most-recent past president serve as chair of the Fellows Selection Committee, suggesting instead that the past president who has served longest on the Committee should serve as chair. The report notes that the current structure "creates a situation in which the committee chair does not have much experience in addressing the issues and precedents that arise when Fellow nominees are considered."

MOTION 5

THAT the Council Handbook, Section VII. Standing Committees and Boards, Committee on the Selection of SAA Fellows, be revised as follows [strikethrough = deletion, underline = addition]:

The committee is composed of the five most recent past presidents of the Society and three Fellows who are elected by the Council at its winter meeting and who serve one-year terms. Past presidents, current members of the Council, and Society staff members are not eligible for election.  The second most recent past president who has served longest on the committee serves as chair of the committee.

Support Statement:  The revised structure will permit the most experienced past president to lead the committee and will give the remaining past presidents more time to learn what kinds of issues arise when considering nominations for the designation of SAA Fellow.

Fiscal Impact:  None.

Moved by Settles; seconded by Vogt-O’Connor.  PASSED.

F.  Appoint Members to Fellows Selection Committee
           
At its winter meeting each year, the SAA Council elects three individuals to serve on the Committee on the Selection of SAA Fellows.  The Committee is composed of the five most recent past presidents of the Society and three Fellows who are elected by the Council.

MOTION 6

THAT Karen Jefferson, Joan Krizack, and Sheryl Vogt be elected to serve on the 2010 Committee on the Selection of SAA Fellows, with Danna Bell-Russel as an alternate.

Support Statement:  Karen Jefferson, Joan Krizack, Sheryl Vogt, and Danna Bell-Russel are well qualified to serve in this important capacity.

Fiscal Impact:  None.

Moved and seconded by the Council. PASSED.
           
G.  Web Guidelines for SAA and Component Groups

From as early as 1997, the SAA Council has established guidelines on the management of component group websites and other electronic communications media. These guidelines are represented in no fewer than five distinct documents posted to the SAA website.  The staff has revised and consolidated the material to create a single, comprehensive, and uniform guideline that addresses the full range of online communications and to update the guidelines to better reflect the current state of SAA’s technical resources and electronic communication in general.

MOTION 7

THAT Guidelines for the Society of American Archivists Websites be amended as specified in Appendix A;

THAT Guidelines for Use of the SAA Logo be amended as specified in Appendix B;

THAT Section and Roundtable annual reporting requirements be amended as indicated in Appendix C and Appendix D (respectively) to specify that: 1) Sections and Roundtables will post their annual reports to their own group websites rather than to SAA’s main website; and 2) Roundtables will file an annual report with the Executive Director;

THAT SAA Section Guidelines and SAA Roundtable Guidelines be amended to strike language regarding group websites and electronic lists and add language indicating that group “websites, e-mail discussion lists, document workspaces, and online social networks will conform to Uniform Guidelines for SAA Websites and Online Communications”;

THAT other miscellaneous amendments to SAA Section Guidelines and SAA Roundtable Guidelines (as indicated in Appendix C and Appendix D) be made in order to reflect current practice; and

THAT Guidelines for Establishment of Listservs by Organizational Units of the Society of American Archivists be rescinded in its entirety and subsumed by Uniform Guidelines for SAA Websites and Online Communications.

Support Statement:  The proposed revisions create a single, comprehensive, and uniform set of guidelines that address the full range of online communications and better reflect the current state of SAA’s technical communications.

Fiscal Impact: None.

Moved by Cline; seconded by Ambacher.  PASSED.

APPENDIX A:
Revisions of Guidelines for the Society of American Archivists Websites
(strikethrough = delete, underline = add)

Guidelines for the Society of American Archivists Websites
Uniform Guidelines for SAA Websites and

Online Communications

 

Overview
The explosive and continuing growth of electronic communications technology publishing on the web presents SAA with the opportunity to better serve its our members and to communicate with and support our organizational units to enhance collaboration between and among internal and external audiences. SAA establishes these guidelines for websites as a means to encourage the their effective development, dissemination, for disseminating, and sharing of resources throughout the Society, to regularize the functions and operations of SAA’s component groups, and to otherwise facilitate the efforts of member leaders. These guidelines apply both to the central or main website online information resources sponsored and/or maintained by the SAA office and to all websites, e-mail discussion lists, wikis, blogs, document sharing sites, and social networks sponsored and/or maintained by official SAA component groups. SAA’s grooperational units (Sections and Roundtables). The guidelines are intended to strengthen the Society’s identity on the Internet and to ensure the most effective use of the sites.

Definitions
SAA network website: The entire collection of websites, pages e-mail discussion lists, wikis, blogs, document sharing sites, and social networks sponsored and/or maintained by the Society of American Archivists and its component groups. subsidiary units.
SAA main website: The central location for the collection of documents maintained by the SAA office and resident residing on its Web server(s) at http://www.archivists.org (a.k.a. the “Extranet”) and http://saa.archivists.org (a.k.a. the “Intranet”).
SAA content management system (CMS): The Web database application maintained by the SAA office and used to administer content published to http://www.archivists.org.
SAA list server: The server application maintained by the SAA office, residing at http://forums.archivists.org, and hosting officially sponsored e-mail discussion lists.
SAA component group website: A subdirectory of the main website for use by an official component group.
SAA auxiliary site: An independently hosted website, e-mail discussion list, wiki, blog, document sharing utility, or social network containing content sponsored and/or maintained by the SAA office or by an official component group.
SAA home page:  The entry point to the SAA website. The URL (uniform resource locator) of the SAA home page is www.archivists.org.

Guidelines
A.  General Guidelines
The SAA home page and subsidiary SAA unit websites are an official publication of the Society of American Archivists.
Documents published by the SAA Council, by the SAA office, or by any SAA component group are official publications of the Society, whether they are posted to the main website, to a component group website, or to an auxiliary website. As such, these publications are subject to the records retention provisions outlined in Article VII of SAA’s Constitution. Individual comments regarding publications posted by members at large (and/or members of the public) to any portion of the SAA network do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Society and are not regarded as SAA publications. The content of all pages on the SAA website shall be related to the functions and mission of the Society of American Archivists, namely to serve the education and information needs of our members and provide leadership to help ensure the identification, preservation, and use of the nation’s historical record.

B.  SAA Main Website Home Page (www.archivists.org)
All documents published to placed on the SAA’s main website home page must have prior are subject to the approval from of the Executive Director. All submissions and/or suggestions for additions to the SAA main website shall be forwarded for consideration to the Executive Director or the Executive Director's designated staff representative(s).
The Executive Director or designee is responsible for the overall design, coding, formatting, and maintenance of the contents of the SAA main website home page. The Executive Director or designee should follow an appropriate style manual, such as the Chicago Manual of Style. that developed by the Yale Center for Advanced Instructional Media (http://info.med.yale.edu/ computing/web/publish/).
Links should be made from the main website SAA home page to component group websites SAA organizational units, and to other professional associations of archivists or allied professions, and to the local hosts of upcoming SAA Annual Meetings. Links to external sites comprising directories of archival websites, non-SAA web publications of archival interest, and such also are desirable. Links will not be made to websites describing individual archival repositories or their holdings.
SAA will maintain links to all auxiliary SAA student chapter websites.

C.  SAA Component Group Organizational Unit Websites
A complete list of official component groups will be published by the SAA office on the main website. Each component group will also have a homepage on the main website containing key leadership information, including a statement of the group’s charge and/or purpose, goals and/or duties, group bylaws (if applicable), links to official rosters of the group’s leaders and/or members, a link to the group’s official e-mail discussion list, and a link to the component group website, if applicable.
The SAA office will provide all SAA boards, committees, sections, roundtables, and working groups with a component group website that may be administered by authorized group leaders via SAA’s content management system. Group leaders are responsible for updating information maintained on component group websites. Subcommittees and task forces may also request a component group website, provision of which will be subject to approval by the Executive Director and dependent on the group’s articulation of a clear statement of purpose for the site that is directly germane to the responsibilities and concerns of that group.

Content published to component group websites will follow an appropriate style manual, such as the Chicago Manual of Style. Key leadership information published to the main website should not be republished to component group websites. Personal contact information of members and member leaders, including e-mail addresses, may not be published to any site that is accessible to Web crawlers and/or spam harvesters.

Group leaders will have primary creative control over the design and content of their component group websites, provided that no website may conflict with the SAA main website or with SAA policies and practices relating to publication, privacy and confidentiality, and ethical conduct. Groups are strongly encouraged to utilize the main website theme (e.g., header, footer, site search utility, and navigation elements) in order to promote usability and effective document retrieval. Groups that elect to design and display a custom theme must display:

  • The uniform SAA logo, in accordance with the policies articulated in the Guidelines for Use of the SAA Logo;
  • A prominent link to the component group website and/or the main website;
  • An appropriate disclaimer stating that SAA does not assume responsibility for the opinions and views published on the auxiliary site; and
  • If necessary, an appropriate disclaimer stating that references to commercial interests (such as vendor listings or advertisements) does not imply any endorsement by SAA.

D. E-mail Discussion Lists
The SAA office will provide all SAA boards, committees, sections, roundtables, and working groups with one or more e-mail discussion lists:

  • Boards, committees, subcommittees, task forces, and working groups will be provided with a private list for use by active members of the component group, the Council liaison, and staff liaisons.
  • Sections and roundtables will be provided with a private list for use by the section and roundtable officers/convener, steering committee members, Council liaison, and staff liaisons.
  • Sections will be supplied with a dual-function announcement list and electronic discussion list. Section members will automatically be subscribed to the announcement function, which section leaders may use for broadcasting official news. Section members may voluntarily modify their list subscriptions to participate in open discussions with other members of the section. Section members may unsubscribe.
  • Roundtables will be supplied with an electronic discussion list to which all roundtable members will automatically be subscribed upon joining the group. Roundtable members may unsubscribe.
  • Active members of SAA boards, committees, subcommittees, task forces, working groups, section steering committees, and roundtable steering committees will automatically be subscribed to the SAA Leader List, a moderated announcement list used by the Executive Director to communicate leadership information to the component groups. Submissions are subject to the approval of the Executive Director.
  • The SAA office will be responsible for managing list software, troubleshooting member subscriptions, and working with officers to maintain accurate subscription lists and policy compliance. As subscriptions to electronic lists will be one of several criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of sections and roundtables, SAA staff will report annually on the number of electronic list subscribers, including those subscribers to roundtable lists who are not members of SAA.

E.  SAA Auxiliary Sites
SAA boards, committees, subcommittees, sections, roundtables, working groups, and task forces organizational units, including both Sections and Roundtables, may not create auxiliary sites, including websites, e-mail discussion lists, wikis, blogs, document sharing sites, and social networks, without prior approval from the Executive Director. Approval to create an SAA auxiliary site shall be dependent on:

  • The group’s demonstration of clear and compelling functional needs that are not or cannot be effectively provided by the SAA office;
  • The ongoing identification of an active group leader who will willingly serve as the site coordinator and perform responsibilities appropriate to that role;
  • The ongoing provision of complete content access to the chair of the component group;
  • Display of an appropriate link and descriptive information on either the component group website or the main website;
  • The group’s agreement to include and regularly display on the auxiliary site:
    • The uniform SAA logo, in accordance with the policies articulated in Guidelines for Use of the SAA Logo;
    • A prominent link to the component group website and/or the main website;
    • An appropriate disclaimer stating that SAA does not assume responsibility for the opinions and views published on the auxiliary site; and
    • If necessary, an appropriate disclaimer stating that references to commercial interests (such as vendor listings or advertisements) does not imply any endorsement by SAA.

Component group Section and Roundtable leaders should be aware that official content published on auxiliary sites remains subject to the records retention provisions outlined in Article VII of SAA’s Constitution and that the SAA office is unable to provide administrative support for content published on third-party servers. data maintained outside of the SAA servers cannot be easily archived or validated.
their own websites provided that they follow all SAA policies, register these publications with the SAA office, use the uniform SAA logo, and establish links to the SAA website.  Organizational units are encouraged, however, to work with the SAA staff to develop websites hosted by SAA servers in order to maintain an official SAA record. 
SAA staff will maintain on the Society’s main website (www.archivists.org) broad information on the goals, leadership, and activities of SAA’s organizational units.  Unit leaders are responsible for updating information maintained on the main SAA website (www.archivists.org).  SAA will offer to host individual Section and Roundtable websites, the content and design of which shall be the responsibility of these units.
Sections and Roundtables may create websites and additional electronic lists on file servers that are not owned by SAA, provided that they follow all SAA policies, register these publications with the SAA office, use the uniform SAA logo, and establish links to the SAA website.
Section and Roundtable leaders should be aware that data maintained outside of the SAA servers cannot be easily archived or validated.
We also encourage SAA organizational units to establish websites for publications whenever such publications enhance a unit’s ability to meet organizational and professional objectives.  In order for an SAA unit to mount a website, it must first be registered with the Executive Office.
Such registration will be dependent on:

  • The unit’s articulation of a clear statement of purpose for the website that is directly germane to the responsibilities and concerns of that unit;
  • The unit’s obtaining space on an Internet-linked computer, or the SAA web server, to host its website;
  • The unit’s agreement to include and regularly display an appropriate disclaimer provided by SAA regarding the responsibilities of SAA and other sponsoring institutions or organizations for the opinions and views expressed in the documents displayed on the website.
  • The unit’s naming a member of the unit as a web liaison and that individual's willingness to conduct responsibilities appropriate to that role;
  • The unit’s agreement to follow an appropriate style manual for design of its site;
  • A statement on the page that references to commercial interests (such as vendor listings or advertisements) does not imply any endorsement by SAA; and
  • A statement on the page that SAA does not assume liability or responsibility for the conduct, content, or currency of any site linked or pointed to from the SAA website.

Once a unit’s website has been registered with the Executive Office, its purpose and address will be published in Archival Outlook, and a link to the site will be made from the SAA home page. Subsidiary governing units of the Society will have primary creative control over the design and content of their websites regardless of where they are hosted, provided that no unit website may conflict with the SAA main website or with SAA policies and practices relating to publication, privacy and confidentiality, and ethical conduct.
We strongly encourage units without the capacity to mount their own websites to submit items for inclusion on the SAA home page, subject to editorial policy.

Adopted by the SAA Council: June 8, 1997; Revised: March 2007, February 2010.

APPENDIX B: 
Revisions of Guidelines for Use of the SAA Logo
(strikethrough = delete, underline = add)

Guidelines for Use of the SAA Logo

SAA component groups constituent units, such as (i.e., boards, committees, subcommittees, task forces, working groups, sections, roundtables, and student chapters), are required to display the approved SAA logo on all materials pertaining to official SAA business, including newsletters, Wwebsites, social networks, posters, and other promotional materials. This should be accompanied by an appropriate disclaimer provided by SAA regarding the responsibilities of SAA and other sponsoring institutions or organizations for the opinions and views expressed in the documents and/or events in question.

Vendors, consultants, and for-profit commercial entities, including institutional members, may not use the SAA logo without obtaining prior written permission from SAA's Executive Director.
The Executive Office is responsible for the design and provision of the SAA logo.

APPENDIX C: 
Revisions of Guidelines for SAA Sections
(strikethrough = delete, underline = add)

Guidelines for SAA Sections

VII. ANNUAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A.  Leadership Report:  The chair of each Section will convey to the Executive Director or designee an electronic list of the names of Section officers and steering committee members within 14 days of the close of the Annual Meeting.  The chair will include in that list all individuals who should be subscribed to the SAA leader announcement list (“saaleaderlist”).

B.  Section Annual Report:  Each Section, like all SAA groups, is required to present an annual report for review by the Council.  Section annual reports must be filed with the SAA Executive Director within 90 days of the close of the Annual Meeting.  (Download the report form.)  The annual report should be a brief summary that includes the following:

  • An accurate list of Section leaders and contact information,
  • A verified count of Annual Meeting attendees,
  • A summary of work accomplished,
  • Goals and plans for the coming year, and
  • Other pertinent information on Section activities.

C.  Section annual reports will be posted on the SAA’s main section’s website.

X. COMMUNICATIONS
A.  Electronic Lists
1. All official electronic lists of SAA Sections will be centrally hosted and managed by the SAA office.
2. All Sections will be supported with separate electronic discussion and e-mail lists for members and for Section leaders.  An annual report on the number of subscribers will be provided by the SAA office.
3. SAA members who are not members of a particular Section may subscribe annually to that Section’s electronic list(s).
4. All Section chairs and designee(s) will have access to a Section announcement list for their members.  These will be hosted and maintained by the SAA office staff.
5. All Section officers and steering committee members will be subscribed automatically to the SAA leader announcement list (“saaleaderlist”).  The chair will forward appropriate leader list announcements to Section members.
6. Electronic lists maintained by Sections remotely will not be considered a replacement for official SAA communication services.

B. Section Websites and the SAA Website
1. Sections may create their own websites provided that they follow all SAA policies, register these publications with the SAA office, use the uniform SAA logo, and establish links to the SAA website.  Section leaders are encouraged, however, to work with SAA staff to develop websites hosted by SAA servers for purposes of continuity and retention of official SAA records. 
2. Upon request, the SAA office will host a Section’s website, the content and design of which will be the responsibility of the Section’s steering committee and website coordinator.  SAA staff will assist Sections in developing standard websites and templates hosted by SAA servers.

3. A. Sections will make available on the main SAA website, as well as the Section website, provide to the SAA staff key leadership information for display on the main SAA website. identified as the “Section Handbook.” The Section Handbook, which will be posted by the SAA office, is This information will be reviewed annually by the Section steering committee and used to orient officers and steering committee members. The Section Handbook The information should contain include, at a minimum, up-to-date versions of the following:

  • A statement of purpose and current goals,
  • The Section bylaws,
  • Specific duties of the officers, including their reporting requirements, and
  • Information on officers and activities from the Section’s annual reports.

B. Section websites, e-mail discussion lists, document workspaces, and online social networks will conform to the Uniform Guidelines for SAA Websites and Online Communications.

4. C. Announcements of employment opportunities shall appear only in SAA’s Archival Outlook and the oOnline Career Center Employment Bulletin, and not in any other SAA Section website publication or other electronic communication. In this way the Society is able to fulfill its legal and fiscal responsibilities to 1) review and, if necessary, edit or refuse announcements that include discriminatory statements inconsistent with principles of intellectual freedom or the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its subsequent amendments; and 2) provide the services contracted for by the institutions and organizations that place ads and announcements in SAA publications.

5. D. Any mailings or electronic communications from Section leaders to their members will also be distributed to the Council and the Executive Office.

6. E. The SAA office will contact Section chairs, in time for publication in the Annual Meeting program book, to request information on plans for the Section meeting at the Annual Meeting.

XIII. USE OF SAA NAME, LOGO, AND AUSPICES
The use of SAA’s name, logo, and auspices for publications, meetings, mailings, websites, social networks, electronic communications, and other activityies is available only through specific provision of the Council and shall conform to the Uniform Guidelines for Use of the SAA Logo. Although Sections are within the SAA structure, they are not empowered to take action in the name of SAA, or request money in the name of SAA or the Section itself, without specific prior authorization from the Council. This firm rule is required to protect SAA and its members from potential legal complications.

Approved by the SAA Council: September 1989
Revised: January 1991, February 1992, January 1993, March 2007, July 2008, February 2010

APPENDIX D: 
Revision of Guidelines for SAA Roundtables
(strikethrough = delete, underline = add)

Guidelines for SAA Roundtables

VI. ANNUAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

A.  Roundtable conveners are required to report the name(s) of their convener(s) for the coming year to the SAA office within 14 days of the close of the Annual Meeting. Conveners are required to complete and file with the Executive Director SAA’s standard an annual report form within 90 days of the close of the Annual Meeting, regardless of whether the Roundtable convenes in conjunction with the Annual Meeting. (Download the report form.) 

C.  Roundtable annual reports, including the update of purpose and activity statements, will be published by the SAA office on the main SAA Roundtable’s website.

C.  Roundtable annual reports, including the update of purpose and activity statements, will be published by the SAA office on the main SAA Roundtable’s website.

IX. COMMUNICATIONS
A.  Electronic Lists
The Society will support Roundtables with multiple electronic lists, websites, and other communication vehicles as they become available.
1. The SAA office will host and manage electronic discussion and announcement lists for all Roundtables.
2. Roundtable conveners will coordinate communication with the SAA office and the Council and will forward appropriate messages from the SAA leader announcement list (“saaleaderlist”) to members.
3. Members may subscribe to an unlimited number of Roundtable electronic discussion lists. The SAA staff and Council liaisons will monitor lists to identify issues of wider importance and to assess the unit’s effectiveness. The number of subscribers will be maintained and reported by SAA staff. 
4. Participation in an unlimited number of Roundtable electronic discussion groups will be open to nonmembers of the Society.

B.  Roundtable Websites
SAA staff will maintain on the Society’s main website (http://www.archivists.org/) broad information on the goals, leadership, and activities of SAA Roundtables. 
1. Conveners are responsible for updating information maintained on the main SAA website (http://www.archivists.org/). 
2. Although SAA staff will host Roundtable websites and create templates for posting data, the content and design of the websites will be the responsibility of the Roundtable and its convener.
3. Roundtables may create websites and additional electronic lists on file servers that are not located within SAA, provided that they follow all SAA policies, register these publications with the SAA office, use the uniform SAA logo, and establish links to the SAA website. Roundtable leaders should be aware that data maintained outside of the SAA servers cannot be easily archived or validated.
C.  Other Communications

A. Roundtable conveners will provide to the SAA staff, and update as necessary, broad information on the goals, leadership, and activities of the Roundtable for display on the main SAA website. This information should be reviewed annually and used to orient incoming Roundtable leaders.

B. Roundtable websites, e-mail discussion lists, document workspaces, and online social networks will conform to Uniform Guidelines for SAA Websites and Online Communications.

1. C. Any mailings or electronic communications from Roundtable leaders to their members should also be distributed to the Council and the SAA Executive Office.

2. D. Announcements of employment opportunities shall appear only in SAA’s Archival Outlook and the Online Career Center, not in any other Roundtable publication or electronic communication.  In this way the Society is able to fulfill its legal and fiscal responsibilities to 1) review and, if necessary, edit or refuse announcements that include discriminatory statements inconsistent with principles of intellectual freedom or the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its subsequent amendments; and 2) provide the services contracted for by the institutions and organizations that place ads and announcements in SAA publications.

3. E. The SAA office will contact conveners, in time for publication in the Annual Meeting program book, to request information on plans for the Roundtable meeting at the Annual Meeting.

XI. USE OF SAA NAME, LOGO, AND AUSPICES
The use of SAA’s name, logo, and auspices for publications, meetings, mailings, websites, social networks, electronic communications, and other activityies is available only through specific provision of the Council and shall conform to Uniform Guidelines for Use of the SAA Logo. Roundtables, although they are within the SAA structure, are not empowered to take action in the name of SAA, or request money in the name of SAA or the Roundtable itself, without specific prior authorization of the Council. This firm rule is required to protect SAA and its members from potential legal complications.

Revised: March 2007, February 2009, June 2009, August 2009, February 2010.

APPENDIX E: 
Guidelines for Establishment of Listservs by SAA Organizational Units

 

Guidelines for Establishment of Listservs by
Organizational Units of the Society of American Archivists

The establishment of Internet-accessible open discussion lists can be an effective means for facilitating discussion on specific topics or among professionals working in related areas and facing common issues.  These listservs can also be an effective device for fostering dialogue among different professionals regarding mutual concerns.

The SAA office will utilize features of its association management software to support multiple lists and discussion forums for SAA Sections and Roundtables. 

  • The SAA Leader List (“saaleaderlist”) will be open to all current Section officers and steering committee members and Roundtable conveners. 
  • Each Section and Roundtable will be supplied with an announcement (or broadcast) list.  Section chairs and Roundtable conveners will be eligible to post to the list, and members will be subscribed automatically.
  • To reduce administrative tracking by the SAA office, authorized posters to the Section announcement lists will be a subset of those authorized as part of the SAA Leader List (“saaleaderlist”).
  • Each Section and Roundtable will be supplied with an electronic discussion list.  SAA members will be allowed to subscribe voluntarily to two Section discussion lists and an unlimited number of Roundtable lists as a member benefit. 
  • Each Section will be supplied with a leaders’ discussion list upon request.
  • SAA headquarters staff will be responsible for managing list software, troubleshooting member subscriptions, and working with officers to maintain accurate subscription lists and policy compliance.  As subscriptions to electronic lists will be one of several criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of Sections and Roundtables, headquarters staff will report annually on the number of electronic list subscribers, including those subscribers to Roundtable lists who are not members of SAA.

Approved by the SAA Council: June 1995
Revised: March 2007; Rescinded: February 2010

 

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 3

For its morning session on Wednesday, February 3, the SAA Council and staff met with the Council of State Archivists Board of Directors, comprising President Patricia Michaelis, Vice President/President-Elect Barbara Teague, and Secretary-Treasurer Terry Ketelsen; and Board members Jim Corridan, Jodie Foley, David Joens, Wayne Moore, Melanie Sturgeon, Julia Marks Young, and David Haury.  Also attending were Kathleen Roe (New York State Archives);  David Carmicheal (The Georgia Archives); Mike Gill (Crowell & Moring); Cynthia Woodside (New York State Archives); and CoSA Executive Director Victoria Irons Walch, Program Officer Jenifer Burlis-Freilich, and Program Associate Rebecca Julson.   SAA Council member Tom Hyry joined the Council on Wednesday morning for the duration of the meeting.

The Council was joined from 4:00 to 5:00 pm by Archivist of the United States David Ferriero, Deputy Archivist of the United States Adrienne Thomas, and NARA External Relations Director David McMillen.

Joint Meeting with the Council of State Archivists’ Board of Directors

SAA Council members and CoSA Board of Directors members discussed with Roe, Carmicheal, Gill, and Woodside the status of the Preserving the American Historical Record (PAHR) legislation, with an emphasis on what SAA and CoSA members might do to ensure passage of the Act.

III. ACTION ITEMS (Continued)
           
H.  CEPC:  Process for Code of Ethics Review/Revision
             
Since 2006, the Committee on Ethics and Professional Conduct (CEPC) has engaged in analysis and review of the current Code of Ethics and discussed the possibility of developing additional guidelines regarding the professional responsibilities of archivists.  The committee proposed that the Code of Ethics undergo revision.  Given that a Code of Ethics is central to a profession, that the membership should have an opportunity to comment on the review and revision process, and that the Council has charged a task force to develop a statement about core values for archivists in 2010 that should inform the revision, the committee proposed a timeline and work plan for the revision.

MOTION 8

THAT the Committee on Ethics and Professional Conduct undertake a review and possible revision of the SAA Code of Ethics, seeking broad member comment and particularly engaging in the process component groups that are not represented on the committee, per the process and timeline outlined, with an understanding that a revised Code will maintain an aspirational (not enforceable) character.

Process and Timeline for Revision of SAA Code of Ethics

 

March 15, 2010:  After the Council minutes are posted and/or any comments and recommendations from the Council are incorporated into the proposal, the proposal will be posted on the CEPC webpage and a notice will be sent to the SAA membership via appropriate list serves that this document is available for review and comment.

March – August 2010:  Continue to gather data and work on elements of the Code as outlined in the proposal.

August 10 – 15, 2010 (Joint Annual Meeting):  The goal of the CEPC meeting will be to develop a draft of the revised Code based on the work we have done in advance.  We will also spread the word about the revision and solicit comment through a variety of methods, including 1) contact section and roundtable leaders and offer to have a CEPC member attend their meeting to discuss the Code revision and 2) discuss the Code revision as part of a forum open to the membership.

August – December 2010:  Incorporate comments and meeting feedback in the Code as appropriate and present to the SAA Council at its winter 2011 meeting.

March 15, 2011:  After SAA Council minutes are posted and/or any comments and recommendations from the Council are incorporated into the revision, the Code will be posted on the CEPC webpage and a request for comment will go out to the membership.

March – May 2011:  Any appropriate changes are incorporated in the Code.

June 2011:  Revised Code submitted for SAA Council meeting agenda.

August 22 – 27, 2011 (Annual Meeting):  Revised Code approved by the SAA Council.

Support Statement:  Given that a code of ethics is central to a profession and that feedback about the SAA Code of Ethics has been received over a period of years, it is appropriate that the Code be brought before the membership for consideration and possible revision.  The proposed timeline will ensure that there is good opportunity for member input and careful consideration by the Committee on Ethics and Professional Conduct and the Council. 

Fiscal Impact:  None.

Moved by Felker, seconded by Vogt-O’Connor. PASSED.

I.  Publications Editor Contract Renewal
                       
Peter J. Wosh has served with distinction as Editor, Print and Electronic Publications, since March 2007.  His contract expires in February 2010, and he is eligible to serve a second three-year term.  Gottlieb discussed with Wosh the possibility of serving a second three-year term and Wosh affirmed his desire to do so.

MOTION 9

THAT Peter J. Wosh be offered a contract for a second three-year term as Editor, Print and Electronic Publications, for the period March 1, 2010, through February 28, 2013.

Support Statement:  Based on comments received during review of his performance, Wosh has done an outstanding job of advancing SAA’s book publishing program.  He is enthusiastic about serving a second three-year term.

Fiscal Impact:  Per contract terms.

Moved by Felker; seconded by Richardson. PASSED.

S.  Executive Session (taken out of order)

J.  Revision of Standards Committee Mission and Procedures

The Standards Committee has completed a two-year process to review and revise its mission and procedures.  Initiated in February 2008, the review process has included surveys, discussions, and research. In February 2009, the Council urged the Standards Committee to continue developing a mission that supports a more proactive role in standards development and maintenance and asked the Standards Committee to bring recommendations to the August 2009 Council meeting addressing the structure, scope, maintenance, and financial implications of a more active Standards Committee.  The Council accepted those recommendations in principle and requested refinements in some areas of the charge and processes.  The following recommendation (with revised materials) responded to the Council’s request.

MOTION 10

THAT the following documents be adopted and incorporated into the SAA Council Handbook (Governance Manual), superseding all previous documents related to the SAA Standards Committee:

  • “Standards Development and Review” (Appendix 1),
  • “Standards Committee Charge and Description” (Appendix 2),
  • “Procedures for Review and Approval of an SAA-Developed Standard” (Appendix 3),
  • “Procedures for SAA Endorsement of an External Standard” (Appendix 4),
  • “Standard Proposal Form” (Appendix 5), and
  • “Proposal to Endorse an External Standard” (Appendix 6); and

THAT the SAA Technical Subcommittee on Descriptive Standards be disbanded with thanks (Appendix 7).

Support Statement:  Taken as a whole, the revised documents related to the mission of the Standards Committee (including its technical subcommittees and development and review teams) and the procedures that it will use for development of new standards and periodic review of existing standards provide an appropriate framework for this critical function of the Society.

Fiscal Impact:  All funding will require prior Council review and approval.

(Council amendments noted:  strikethrough = delete, underline = add)

APPENDIX 1

Standards Development and Review

 Responsibilities of the Standards Committee

The SAA Standards Committee, created by the Council of the Society of American Archivists in 1990, is responsible for initiating and facilitating the development of standards; providing review and comment on standards that are relevant to archival theory and practice; educating the archives community about the value and role of standards; and partnering with related information management professional organizations on standards of mutual concern and interest.

A primary responsibility of the Standards Committee is to establish, with Council approval, procedures for initiating, developing, reviewing, and approving all standards developed by the Society of American Archivists through its subgroups, as well as procedures for reviewing standards submitted by external groups to SAA for its endorsement.  [Link to Procedures]

The Standards Committee works with groups on standards and standards-related projects from the initiation of the proposal, through development or review, to submission of the standard to the SAA Council for final approval.

The Standards Committee also coordinates the work of SAA representatives to standards organizations, including the National Information Standards Organization (NISO), the Association for Information and Image Management (AIIM), the American Library Association (ALA), the American Institute for the Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works (AIC), and ARMA International (per a 2008 Memorandum of Understanding for Standards Development between ARMA and SAA).  [Link to document]

Standards

The SAA Standards Committee defines a “standard” to be an industry agreement that establishes qualities or practices that make possible sharing of information, development of common vocabularies and practices, and more effective interaction among archivists, librarians, records managers, information managers, preservation administrators, historians, and other allied professionals. SAA standards must be approved by the SAA Council and they are maintained and periodically reviewed by professionals in the community.

Standards of many types are now central to archival practice. This document will generally use the term “standards” to refer to all of these types, including standards used in automated information systems, in preservation management, and in other technical areas, as well as standards and guidelines relating to professional practice.

Standards can take many forms: 

  • The most exacting are technical standards (e.g., Z39.50, the standard for intersystem data searching and retrieval) which, if applied correctly, can be expected to produce uniform and consistent results.
  • Conventions or rules are more flexible and can accommodate more variation in local practice (e.g., Describing Archives: A Content Standard [DACS]). They will produce similar, but not necessarily identical, results when applied consistently.
  • Guidelines provide models of preferred practices and/or serve as criteria against which to measure products or programs (e.g., Archival and Special Collections Facilities Guidelines for Archivists, Librarians, Architects, and Engineers). 
  • Best practices are procedures and guidelines based on experience and research that demonstrate that they are optimal and efficient means to produce a desired result (1).  Although best practices will not be considered to be official SAA standards, they represent consensus within the Society.

(1) The Standards Committee has modified the best practice definition from: A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology. Retrieved May 26, 2009, from: http://www.archivists.org/glossary/term_details.asp?DefinitionKey=1770

The Standards Committee will not be concerned with the creation and maintenance of thesauri.

Best Practices

SAA is involved in developing best practices, which may be drafted by the Society’s committees, sections, roundtables, or other designated groups. Best practices are procedures and guidelines based on experience and research that demonstrate that they are optimal and efficient means to produce a desired result.  In contrast to standards, best practices: 

  • Generally are developed in emerging areas,
  • May eventually become formal standards if they become widely accepted and used, and
  • Are monitored periodically, but are not subject to a formal and regular review and maintenance cycle.

The procedures for best practice development and review are less formal than those for other standards’ development and review. The developing group submits a completed best practice document along with a proposal form [link] to the Standards Committee for consideration. The Standards Committee votes on the proposed project and, if it is approved, the chair of the Standards Committee forwards the documentation to the SAA Council for official endorsement. The Standards Committee posts all SAA-adopted best practices to the standards webpage on the SAA website.

Developing Standards within SAA

The Society of American Archivists recognizes the central importance of consensus to the development of standards. However, consensus on a specific standard may not always equate with unanimous and unqualified approval by all concerned, for in most cases this will be difficult to achieve.

The Standards Committee procedures for standards development within SAA mandate broad review of any proposed standard by all groups, both inside and outside of SAA, that have an interest in the standard. Important features of the review process are:

  • Establishment of the need for the standard through a formal "request for initiation of a standards project";
  • Publication of notices in appropriate SAA media about initiation and ongoing progress in standards development projects;
  • Publication and/or distribution of full texts of proposed standards by the SAA office; and
  • Formal invitations to representatives from outside organizations to participate in the development and/or review of drafts of proposed standards.

The Standards Committee is concerned both with the development of new standards and with the process of standards maintenance and review.

The best possible effort will be made to ensure that all reasonable opinions are considered in the development process and that most disputes are resolved before a document is deemed ready for consideration by the Council as an SAA standard. Responsibility for the content of a standard rests both with the group that is developing or revising the document and with existing subgroups within SAA that are developing a standard.

Final adoption of a document as an SAA standard rests with the Officers and Council of the Society of American Archivists.

Once a standard is adopted, an ongoing technical subcommittee of the Standards Committee is assigned maintenance responsibilities to ensure that the document is promulgated widely, monitored in its application, and reviewed (and, if necessary, revised) on a regular schedule.

The Standards Committee has prepared detailed procedures for standards development and review.  [Link to Procedures]

SAA also plays an important role as a participant in work undertaken by other organizations, such as the National Information Standards Organization (NISO) and the Association for Information and Image Management (AIIM) that develop technical standards.

For Information or Assistance

The Standards Committee is ready to assist any SAA subgroup or outside organization to devise a strategy for developing a new standard or for reviewing and/or revising an existing document so that it can be considered for formal adoption as an SAA standard.  Please contact the chair or any member of the Standards Committee for further information.  [Link to roster]

 

APPENDIX 2

Standards Committee Charge and Description

I. Purpose

The Standards Committee is responsible for initiating and facilitating the development of standards (2); providing review and comment on standards that are relevant to archival theory and practice; educating the archives community about the value and role of standards; and partnering with related information management professional organizations on standards of mutual concern and interest.

(2) For the purposes of this document, the term “standards” includes standards, technical standards, conventions, rules, guidelines, and best practices.  See “Standards Development and Review” for more information.

II. Committee Selection, Size, and Length of Term

The Standards Committee consists of nine appointed members who serve staggered three-year terms, one of whom shall serve as chair. The Committee also shall include ex officio members, including chairs of all technical subcommittees and development and review teams that report to the Standards Committee, representatives of other SAA groups whose interests and activities closely interact with those of the Standards Committee, and members who serve as SAA’s representatives to external organizations that deal with matters within the Committee's area of concern. Ex officio members shall include:

  • The immediate past chair of the Standards Committee, who shall serve as an ex officio member for one year.
  • SAA’s representative to the Association for Information and Image Management;
  • SAA’s representative to the ARMA International Standards Development Committee;
  • SAA's representative to the American Library Association’s Committee on Machine-Readable Recording of Bibliographic Information (MARBI), responsible for maintaining MARC21;
  • SAA’s representative to the American Library Association’s Committee on Cataloguing Description and Access (CC:DA);
  • SAA’s representative to the National Information Standards Organization (NISO);
  • A representative from the Canadian Council of Archives’ Canadian Committee on Archival Description;
  • Other SAA representatives appointed to standards-developing organizations; and
  • Those chairs of each development and review team who are not appointed members of the Standards Committee.

The SAA Vice President annually appoints three members, whose terms begin at the end of the Annual Meeting.  The Vice President biennially appoints the chair.  The chair shall serve a two-year term after serving for at least one year on the Standards Committee. Following the chair’s two-year appointment, the chair shall become an ex officio member for one year.

Technical subcommittees.  The Standards Committee may form (and disband) technical subcommittees. The Committee will charge these technical subcommittees to oversee all SAA adopted standards. Technical subcommittees are responsible for the maintenance and review of the assigned standard (which requires that they monitor all feedback and calls for revision of the standard) and for promoting the standard and educating appropriate communities about it.  Technical subcommittee chairs serve as regular or ex officio members of the Standards Committee. With the recommendations of the Standards Committee, the SAA Vice President appoints technical subcommittee chairs and members. Technical subcommittee members must have expertise related to the standard that they are responsible for maintaining.  Technical subcommittees may be disbanded by the Standards Committee with Council approval if the standard for which they are responsible is not scheduled for review.   Technical subcommittees are ongoing as long as the adopted standard remains in use.

Development and review teams.  The Standards Committee may form (and disband) development and review teams around a project to develop a specific standard or a particular topic (such as description or preservation).  All groups that are researching and developing a standard are given a development and review team designation. When the Standards Committee identifies areas that require specialized or technical expertise in which the number of standards, the degree of technical expertise required, and the speed of change in the standards landscape are such that the Standards Committee by itself could not keep pace, it appoints a development and review team to monitor and review these standards.  Development and review teams might also be built around a particular topic to study the need for standards in that area.  Development and review teams are ad hoc and re-chargeable annually.

For all approved standards development projects, the Standards Committee assigns a development and review team to be responsible for developing the standard, which will most often be the group that proposed the original project. Development and review team chairs shall be appointed by the SAA Vice President and serve as regular or ex officio members of the Standards Committee.

III. Reporting Procedures

The chair prepares an annual report and submits it to the Council in accordance with established procedures. The chair is responsible for coordinating the formulation and evaluation of the annual report and other planning documents as needed in consultation with Standards Committee members. The chair of each current technical subcommittee and development and review team is responsible for preparing and submitting an annual report of the group's activities to the Standards Committee chair.

IV. Duties and Responsibilities

To fulfill its mission as described above, the Standards Committee is specifically charged to:

  • Oversee the process of standards development by identifying standards needs; establishing technical subcommittees or development and review teams, as necessary, to research,  prepare, monitor, and review standards; and recommending action on proposed standards to the SAA Council.
  • Develop, implement, and periodically review a profession-wide plan to address all standards needs across all the core competencies of the profession.
  • Review or endorse, Monitor and review, and recommend for endorsement when appropriate, other national and international standards that affect archival practice.
  • Implement a process for the periodic review of all standards that are relevant to archival theory and practice.
  • Conduct maintenance reviews of SAA-adopted standards in accordance with established review cycles.
  • Publicize and promote standards-related news and information to the archives community.
  • Work in concert with the Program and Education committees and SAA staff to endorse and develop workshops, conference programs, and other educational opportunities related to archives standards.
  • Collaborate with international and national associations on standards development projects, with an understanding that the SAA Council must approve in advance all contractual and financial obligations.

VI. Meetings

The Standards Committee meets once per year at the SAA annual meeting.  Depending on operational need and contingent on SAA Council funding, the Committee or subgroups of it may meet midyear.   Periodic conference call meetings may be scheduled as needed.  Although regular meetings are open to any SAA member who wishes to attend, the Committee shall also hold public meetings as needed at the SAA annual meeting to report on the progress of ongoing standards development or to review projects and to receive questions and suggestions.

 

APPENDIX 3

Procedures for Review and Approval of an
SAA-Developed Standard

I. Submission of a Proposal for a Project to Create, Revise, or Review an SAA-Developed Standard

Proposals must be submitted by official groups within SAA. Individuals interested in the development of a standard may consult with the Standards Committee about groups that are appropriate for submission of a standards proposal.

I.A. The proposing group shall:

I.A.1. Download a blank PROPOSAL FORM from the Standards Committee webpage.  [Link to form]

I.A.2. Complete the PROPOSAL FORM, which shall include:

- Name of sponsoring group and name of individual to contact;
- Concise statement of identified need for standard;
- Expected effect/impact on individuals and institutions;
- Scope of coverage/application;
- Anticipated format and content of the standard;
- Known existing standards that are closely related to or affected by the proposed standard;
- List of other SAA subgroups, outside organizations, and experts who will be consulted during the development or will be asked to review the standard before it is submitted for adoption by the SAA Council;
- Time table for development process; and
- Budgetary implications for SAA, including direct costs for meetings, travel, copying, and postage as well as indirect costs for SAA staff time.

I.A.3. File the PROPOSAL FORM with the Standards Committee.

I.B. The Standards Committee chair shall:

I.B.1. Enter receipt of the PROPOSAL FORM in the STANDARDS PROJECT LOG on the Standards Committee webpage and send acknowledgement of receipt to the proposing body.

I.B.2. Distribute copies of the PROPOSAL FORM to the other members of the Standards Committee. The chair may also distribute copies of the proposal form to technical subcommittees or development and review teams for comment.

I.B.3. Collect comments and suggestions from members of the Standards Committee and other subgroups to which the proposal was distributed.

II. Standards Committee Action in Response to Proposal

The Standards Committee will take one of the following actions in response to a proposal, as appropriate:

II.A. Return for revision

The Standards Committee will return to the proposing group a PROPOSAL FORM that is incomplete or that requires revision and request that it be revised and resubmitted.

II.B. Decline proposal

The Standards Committee may decline to approve undertaking a standards project because

(1)  A similar standard already exists;
(2)  The proposed standard is in direct conflict with an SAA-adopted standard or policy;
(3)  Another group is already working on a similar standard (in which case the Standards Committee will suggest that the two parties work together toward common ends);
(4)  There is insufficient demand or potential benefit to SAA members to warrant the expense of its development;
(5)  The proposed standard does not fall within the scope of the Standards Committee;
(6)  The proposed standard would be more appropriate as a best practice (in which case the Standards Committee will advise the proposing group to follow the procedures for developing a best practice).
The Standards Committee will forward all declined proposals to the SAA Council along with the reason why the Standards Committee declined the proposal. The proposing group may file an appeal with the SAA Council within 60 days of notification by the Committee.

II.C. Submit request for Council approval to undertake project (when necessary)

Some proposals may require significant financial support from SAA (e.g., creation of an ad hoc task force). If the Standards Committee agrees that the proposal has merit but may require significant SAA funding, the Standards Committee will send the PROPOSAL FORM and any accompanying correspondence or other documentation to the SAA Council for approval to undertake the project.  The Council's Executive Committee may be able to grant approval in order to expedite the process.

II.D. Approve proposal and announce intention to initiate project

If the Standards Committee agrees that the proposal has merit (and any necessary Council approval to undertake the project has been granted), it will publish a “Notice of Intention to Initiate a Standards Development Project” via all appropriate SAA media. This step is taken to notify the membership that a project will soon be under way and to solicit comments and participation from interested parties. Official project approval will be granted automatically 30 days after publication of the "Notice" unless the comments received by the Standards Committee chair are such that the proposal warrants reconsideration, in which case the Committee will refer the proposal and comments back to the proposing group for review and response.

II.E. Make assignment to primary group for development

For approved standards development projects, the Standards Committee will assign a development and review team to be responsible for developing the standard. In most cases, the members of the proposing group will become the members of the development and review team. In some cases, the Council may create an ad hoc task force or working group to take responsibility for the development process. Once the standard is adopted, the Standards Committee will assign a technical subcommittee to maintain and review the adopted standard (see V.C.I.).  In all cases, the SAA Vice President will appoint the chairs of the development and review teams and technical subcommittees. 

III. Standards Development Process

III.A. Consultation with other SAA subgroups and external organizations

The developing group (either a development and review team or a task force) will engage in extensive consultation with interested parties inside and outside of SAA that are essential to the development of standards, and must submit to the Standards Committee evidence that such consultation has taken place. The developing group must address all written comments sent to the group and all comments made at an SAA open meeting. The Standards Committee will assist the developing group in publicizing the project and identifying consultants.
Consultation should be pursued through several means:

III.A.1. Letters sent at the beginning of the project to heads of organizations known to have an interest in the standard under development, inviting their comments and/or participation in the development process, as appropriate.

III.A.2. Publication of notices in the newsletters or on the websites of these organizations about the intention to develop the standard and, later, providing updates on the progress of the development project.

III.A.3. Publication of the draft standard in appropriate SAA media.

III.A.4. Publication of the draft standard in external publications and/or circulation of the draft standard to heads of interested organizations.

III.A.5. Circulation of the draft standard to groups and individuals, inside and outside of SAA, with particular interest or expertise in the topic, including posting on electronic networks.

III.A.6. Joint meetings with interested organizations to discuss common concerns. These meetings could occur at the outset of the project or after circulation of a draft standard.

III.A.7. Open forums or hearings at the SAA annual meeting.

III.B. Preparation of the package containing the final draft of the standard and supporting documentation

Once it has completed the consultation process and prepared the final draft of the standard, the developing group will compile a package to forward to the Standards Committee for its review. This package will include:

III.B.1. Full text of the proposed standard.

III.B.2. Introductory narrative.

This section must include the scope of application, in particular:

  • The purpose or objective of the proposed standard and
  • The specific audiences, circumstances, or techniques to which it is directed.
  • It should also contain background and other supplementary information, as necessary, that can provide a context for understanding how the standard was developed and when and how it will be used, including
  • Brief history and methodology of its development,
  • Participants in the development process,
  • Relationship to predecessor documents,
  • Significant changes from earlier versions,
  • Glossary or definitions of terms, if necessary,
  • Illustrations or examples of how the standard can be applied, and
  • Bibliography, if necessary.

III.B.3. Documentation of the consultation process.
The developing group must submit documentation that the consultation process has taken place and that a reasonable agreement has been reached on the contents and intent of the proposed standard. This evidence may take the form of:

  • Copies of correspondence from other organizations supporting the proposed standard;
  • Clippings from publications and/or websites that publicized the development project or published drafts of the standard;
  • Copies of correspondence discussing areas of dispute in the proposed standard;
  • In case of unresolved disputes, explanations from the group responsible for development of efforts made to accommodate the expressed concerns and/or justification for approving the standard in the absence of universal agreement.

III.B.4. Maintenance and review plan

The developing group must recommend a plan for maintenance and review of the standard it has developed. All adopted SAA standards will be assigned to an ongoing SAA technical subcommittee for necessary maintenance and review. Each will be assigned to a review cycle of no more than 5 years, at which time the SAA Council will be asked to reaffirm, revise, or rescind the standard. The "Maintenance and Review Plan" will suggest the appropriate subgroup for assignment and length of the review cycle. (See V.C.)

III.C. Notice of abandoned project

In the event that the developing group fails to reach general agreement on a draft standard or, for whatever reason, chooses to discontinue its work on the proposed standard, it shall notify the Standards Committee that it has abandoned the project. The Standards Committee shall publish a notice in appropriate SAA media that the project has been discontinued.

IV. Standards Committee Review of Draft Standard

Upon receiving the final draft package from the developing group, the Standards Committee will take the following actions:

IV.A. Review package

The Standards Committee will review the package to ensure that it is complete and that adequate consultation and review have taken place. It may return the package to the developing group if significant elements are missing.

IV.B. Notice of project completion/publication of revised draft standard

IV B.1. Notice of project completion.

When the final draft package is deemed complete, the Standards Committee will publish a notice in the appropriate SAA media announcing that the standards development project has been completed and the draft standard has been forwarded to the Council. (See IV.C.)

IV B.2. Publication of revised draft standard.

Based on the substance of the revisions, the potential breadth of impact, and any apparent remaining substantive conflicts on content, the Standards Committee may determine that the entire revised text should be published via an appropriate SAA medium in order to ensure the broadest possible participation in and awareness of the standards development process. The Standards Committee will accept written comments on the revised draft addressed to the Standards Committee chair within 30 days of publication of the revised draft or notice of the availability of the revised draft.
If additional comments received after publication of the revision indicate widespread disagreement about the revised draft within the SAA membership, the Committee may determine that the draft should be referred back to the developing group for response. Alternatively, after careful review by the Standards Committee and through its consultation with experts in the field, the committee may refer the draft back to the development group due to such concerns as content, scope, functionality, conflicts with other standards, inapplicability, etc.Substantive changes to the draft standard as a result of these additional comments may require publication of a new "Notice of Completion" and notification or publication of a new revised draft.

The Standards Committee may determine that issues raised in the additional comments were already addressed adequately during the development and consultation process. The Standards Committee will then publish the notice of completion and forward the package to the SAA Council.

IV.C. Recommendation to the SAA Council

At the conclusion of the development process, the Standards Committee will send to the SAA Council a report on the process and a recommendation.

IV.C.1. Recommendation to consider adoption.
When the Standards Committee is satisfied that the development and consultation process has been completed satisfactorily it will, after publication of the notice, forward the package to the SAA Council with a recommendation that the Council consider adopting the draft document as an official standard of the Society of American Archivists.

IV.C.2. Report on "irreconcilable differences."
After reviewing all documentation, the Standards Committee may determine that disagreements raised represent substantive irreconcilable differences of views or professional positions. In this situation, the Standards Committee will forward the package to the SAA Council with an explanation of the remaining problems and, depending on the type of standard and breadth of impact, may or may not recommend that the Council consider adopting the draft as an official standard of the Society of American Archivists.

V. Promulgation, Maintenance, and Review of Adopted Standards

The Standards Committee shall ensure that the following actions are taken for each standard that is formally adopted by the SAA Council. Often the group that developed the standard will be actively involved in or have primary responsibility for these activities.

V.A. Publication of the standard

V.A.1. Full text in the SAA newsletter.

The preferred method of publication will be to publish the full text of the adopted standard in the Society’s newsletter and on the SAA website.

V.A.2. Notice of availability in newsletter.

Some standards may be too long to publish in the newsletter.  For these, a notice of their approval and a summary of their contents will be published in the next SAA newsletter and/or on the SAA website, along with information about how to obtain a copy from the SAA website.

V.A.3. Notice in The American Archivist.

Both SAA’s journal of record, The American Archivist, and the SAA website carry official Council meeting minutes, which will record all formal approvals of SAA standards.

V.A.4. Added to Standards Committee webpage.

The Standards Committee will post all formally adopted standards on the Standards Committee webpage with the following information: 1) the name of the standard, 2) a description of the standard, 3) a link to the full text of the standard or a description of where the standard can be obtained, 4) the date on which the standard was adopted, 5) next review date of the standard, 6) information about how comments and feedback for revision can be submitted, and 7) any additional supporting documents or information.

V.B. Promotion of the standard

V.B.1. Notice to heads of allied professional organizations.

The President and/or Executive Director will send a letter and copy of the adopted standard to all interested outside organizations to notify them of SAA's action. The Standards Committee will assist the group that developed the standard in drafting the letter and identifying which groups to contact.

V.B.2. Press release to editors of professional journals and newsletters.

The Executive Director will, in cooperation with the Standards Committee and developing group, ensure that a press release is distributed to editors of allied professional journals and newsletters to announce the development and approval of the standard, providing its full text when possible.

V.B.3. Other publicity.

For standards of interest beyond professional circles, the Executive Director, Standards Committee, and developing group will determine how best to publicize their approval. Working in concert with the Program and Education committees and the SAA staff, the Standards Committee will assist the subgroup in developing workshops, conference sessions, or public forums on the new standard.

V.C. Maintenance of the standard

Immediately upon adoption of an SAA standard, the following actions shall occur:

V.C.1. Subgroup responsible for maintenance and review assigned.

As part of the approval process, the Standards Committee will assign the standard to an ongoing SAA technical subcommittee for maintenance and review. In most cases, the technical subcommittee will include members of the development and review team that has been actively involved in its development.  The chair will be appointed by the SAA Vice President.

V.C.2. Review cycle set.

All adopted SAA standards will be assigned a review cycle of no more than 5 years, with a formal review commencing no later than 3 years following adoption or reaffirmation. However, comments and revisions to the standard and proposals to revise adopted standards may be submitted at any time. At the end of the review cycle, the SAA Council will be asked to reaffirm, agree to revise, or rescind the standard.

V.C.3. Monitoring and promulgating use begins.

The maintaining technical subcommittee will be responsible for promoting the proper and effective use of the standard and will regularly obtain comments and feedback on the standard for future review and revision.

V.D. Review of the standard

At least two years before the review cycle expires, the Standards Committee will notify the maintaining technical subcommittee that it should initiate a formal review of the content and use of the standard. The following actions shall be taken:

V.D.1. Review plan prepared.

In consultation with the Standards Committee, the technical subcommittee will prepare a plan that will ensure consensus using the same kinds of broadly based consultation and review that occurred when the standard was originally developed. The plan may include:

  • Other SAA subgroups and interested organizations outside of SAA that the technical subcommittee plans to consult;
  • Proposed joint meetings with some of these subgroups and/or organizations to discuss proposed revisions;
  • Proposed public hearings at the SAA annual meeting;
  • Proposed publications, websites, or other communication media via which comments and proposed revisions will be submitted and be made publicly available; and
  • Financial resources needed for review, such as travel or editorial support.

V.D.2. Standards Committee and SAA Council review plan.
The technical subcommittee will submit the plan to the Standards Committee, at which point the Standards Committee will decide whether the review process is adequate. If significant financial resources are required for review, the Standards Committee will forward the plan to the SAA Council with a recommendation for funding.

V.D.3. Recommendation to revise, reaffirm, or rescind the standard.

Once the review plan has been approved, the technical subcommittee shall commence the formal review. When adequate consultation has taken place, the technical subcommittee shall recommend one of the following:
Revise the standard:  Revision will be necessary if substantial changes to the standard are required.

Reaffirm the standard:  The technical subcommittee may decide that a standard does not need revision at this time if comments are relatively minor and the standard is still current and widely used. The technical subcommittee may also delay revision while awaiting the development or revision of another standard or project that may affect the standard under review.

Rescind the standard:  The technical subcommittee may recommend rescinding the standard if the standard is no longer relevant or another standard has replaced it.

V.E. Recommendation to the SAA Council

V.E.1. The maintaining technical subcommittee will submit a package to the Standards Committee containing its recommendation to reaffirm, revise, or rescind the standard along with documentation about the review process (as in III.). If the technical subcommittee recommends revision, the technical subcommittee will also submit a completed proposal form (as in I.A.2.).

V.E.2. The Standards Committee will review the package to ensure that the review plan was adequate. Assuming that no procedural questions remain unresolved, it will forward the package to the Council with the recommendation to reaffirm, revise, or rescind.

V.E.3. The SAA Council votes on whether to reaffirm, revise, or rescind the standard.
If the Council votes to revise the standard, the technical subcommittee will continue the revision work. Once the revision has been completed, the technical subcommittee will follow the same process for submission and approval of a new standard, as outlined in sections III.B. and later.
If the Council reaffirms the standard, a new review cycle will be set, which may be shorter than 5 years. A new technical subcommittee may be appointed, if necessary. The technical subcommittee and the Standards Committee will inform all relevant parties that the standard has been reaffirmed and does not require revision at this time.
Should the Council vote to rescind the standard, the technical subcommittee and the Standards Committee will inform all relevant parties that the standard has been rescinded. The Standards Committee will then either remove the standard from the standards webpage or mark the standard as “rescinded.”

V.F. Notice and publication of reaffirmed, revised, or rescinded standards.
An information dissemination process similar to that outlined under V.A. and V.B. for new standards will be followed to ensure broad awareness of SAA actions concerning reaffirmed, revised, and rescinded standards.

APPENDIX 4

Procedures for SAA Endorsement of an External Standard

 

I. Submission of a Proposal to Endorse an External Standard

Proposals must be submitted by official groups within the SAA. Individuals who are interested in submitting a proposal for the endorsement of an external standard may consult with the Standards Committee on appropriate groups to which they may wish to submit a proposal.

I.A. The proposing group shall:

I.A.1. Download a blank PROPOSAL FORM from the Standards Committee webpage on the SAA website.  [link]

I. A. 2. Complete the PROPOSAL FORM, which shall include:

  • Name of the standard;
  • Brief summary of the standard;
  • Sponsoring organization;
  • Location of the standard (website link, publication details, etc.);
  • Effect/impact of the standard on archival practice;
  • A discussion of how the standard is being used in the archives profession (Who is using it? How is it being used? Is it widely used?);
  • Review and revision procedures of the standard (Who reviews the standard? How often is the standard reviewed? Is the review process open?); and
  • Known existing standards that are closely related to or affected by the standard being proposed for endorsement.

I.A.3. File the PROPOSAL FORM with the Standards Committee.

I.B. The Standards Committee chair shall:

I.B.1. Enter receipt of the PROPOSAL FORM in the STANDARDS PROJECT LOG on the Standards Committee webpage and send acknowledgement of receipt to the proposing body.

I.B.2. Distribute copies of the PROPOSAL FORM to the other members of the Standards Committee.  The chair may also distribute copies of the proposal form to technical subcommittees or development and review teams for comment.

I.B.3. Collect comments and suggestions from members of the Standards Committee and other subgroups to which the proposal was distributed.

I.B.4. Arrange for a discussion to determine whether there is a consensus to endorse the standard.

II. Standards Committee Action in Response to Proposal

The Standards Committee will take a formal vote in response to the proposal:

II. A. Return for revision.

The Standards Committee will return to the submitting group a proposal form that is incomplete or that requires revision and request that it be revised and resubmitted.

II. B. Decline.

The Standards Committee may decline the endorsement of an external standard because: 1) the external standard is in direct conflict with an SAA-adopted standard or policy; 2) there is insufficient demand or potential benefit to SAA members; 3) the standard is not widely adopted or used in the archives field; or 4) the review process does not allow for SAA contribution or comment.

II. C. Endorse.

If the Standards Committee agrees that the external standard has benefit to the SAA community, it will recommend the standard to the SAA Council for endorsement. It will then take the following actions:

  • Publish the full standard or link to the standard on the standards webpage along with the endorsement proposal.
  • Notify the SAA community about the endorsement through appropriate SAA media.

APPENDIX 5

Standard Proposal Form

This is a form for:

□ The development of a new SAA standard
□ The review and adoption of an existing document as an SAA standard
□ The revision of an existing SAA standard

Name of submitting group:

 

Date submitted:

 

Name of contact person:

 

Daytime phone:

 

E-mail:

 

Fax:

 

Mailing address:

 

Title (or topic) of standard:

 

Please include a written statement that covers the following:

  • A concise explanation of:
  • Identified need for the standard.
  • Expected effect/impact on individual archivists and/or archival institutions.
  • Scope of coverage/application.
  • Anticipated format and content of the standard.
  • Known existing standards that are closely related to or affected by the proposed standard.
  • List of other SAA subgroups, outside organizations, and/or individuals who will be consulted during the development of the standard or who will be asked to review the standard before it is submitted for adoption.
  • Project timetable for the development process.
  • Budgetary implications for SAA entailed in the development, review, and revision process (including direct costs for meetings, travel, copying, and postage as well as indirect costs for SAA staff time).

When applicable, also attach a copy of the existing standard or document.

Send this form along with accompanying documentation to the Chair of the Standards Committee. Current contact information for the chair may be found online at: http://www.archivists.org/governance/leaderlist-index.asp.

APPENDIX 6

Name of submitting group:

 

Date submitted:

 

Name of contact person:

 

Daytime phone:

 

E-mail:

 

Fax:

 

Mailing address:

 

 

Name of the standard:

 

Sponsoring organization:

 

Location of standard (website link or publication details):

 

Please include a written statement that covers the following:

  1. Brief summary of the standard.
  2. Effect/impact of the standard on archival practice.
  3. Discussion of the standard’s use within the archives profession.  (Who is using it? How is it being used? Is it widely used?)
  4. Review and revision procedures of the standard.  (Who reviews the standard? How often is it reviewed? Is the review process open?)
  5. Known existing standards that are closely related to or affected by the standard being proposed for endorsement.

When applicable, also attach a copy of the existing standard or document.

Send this form along with accompanying documentation to the Chair of the Standards Committee. Current contact information for the chair may be found online at: http://www.archivists.org/governance/leaderlist-index.asp.

APPENDIX 7

SAA Technical Subcommittee on Descriptive Standards

Transition Recommendations

As part of its restructuring, the SAA Standards Committee has recommended that the Technical Subcommittee on Descriptive Standards be dissolved.  The members of TSDS were full participants in the Standards Committee restructuring process and support the decision. The following is a list of recommendations concerning the dissolution of TSDS and the transfer of its responsibilities.

Members

TSDS has seven members (excluding ex officio members).  The terms of two members, Doris Malkmus and chair Michael Rush, expire at the 2009 Annual Meeting.  The terms of Megan Friedel and Kathryn Young continue to 2010 and those of Laura Davis, Mark Matienzo, and Cory Nimer expire in 2011.  The restructuring of the Standards Committee includes expanding the committee from six to nine members, requiring an additional member for each three-year staggered term.  As such, I recommend that two members of TSDS, one whose term expires in 2010 and one whose term expires in 2011, be appointed to the Standards Committee to serve out the remainder of their terms.  This, combined with three new members of Standards, will provide the needed nine members with staggered 3-year terms and provide some overlap with the expertise of TSDS.

Ex Officio Members

Ex officio members of TSDS should be transferred to the Standards Committee.  This includes the chairs of the Description and Reference, Access, and Outreach sections, the representatives to MARBI and CCDA, a representative of CCAD, and the chairs of the EAD and EAC Working Groups.  Several of these are already ex officio members of the Standards Committee.  The EAD Roundtable has had an ex officio representative to TSDS but, as it’s unclear when or why this practice began, I recommend that it be discontinued.

Responsibilities

TSDS’s primary responsibility for the past few years has been to monitor, review, and provide comment on emerging standards in the realm of archival description.  The chair has monitored such activities and/or been alerted to calls for comment by the Standards Committee chair.  I recommend that the chair of the Standards Committee appoint one of the former TSDS members to serve as Descriptive Standards Coordinator, responsible for relevant activity in the profession and prompting action by the Standards Committee as appropriate.

Reporting Committees

I recommend that any and all committees and/or working groups reporting to TSDS, including the EAD and EAC Working Groups, report to the Standards Committee.

Current Agenda Items

TSDS voted in February to ask the EAD Roundtable to undertake a revision of EAD.  A formal request was sent to the chair of the EAD Roundtable, with no response to date.  TSDS expects EAC-CPF (Corporate Bodies, Persons, Families) to be proposed as an SAA standard by the EAC Working Group this year.  After that, TSDS expects the EAC Working Group to begin work on EAC-F (Functions).  I recommend that pursuing a revision of EAD and encouraging the ongoing work of the EAC WG be priorities for the Standards Committee.

Michael Rush, TSDS Chair, 2007-2009
michael.rush@yale.edu

July 6, 2009

Moved by Felker as amended; seconded by Vogt-O’Connor seconded.  PASSED.

K.  Charges for Standards Committee’s EAD Technical Subcommittee and Schema Development Team 

The proposed revision to the Standards Committee charge and procedures (Agenda Item III.J.) stipulated that there be a standing technical subcommittee for each SAA-approved and -maintained standard.  This report included a recommended charge for a new Technical Subcommittee for Encoded Archival Description (TS-EAD), which would succeed the EAD Working Group as the group responsible for maintenance and promotion of Encoded Archival Description, and a recommended charge for a new Schema Development Team (SDT).  The SDT would be a small group, reporting to both the TS-EAD and the Encoded Archival Context Working Group, with responsibility for all technical schema development work.  The committee proposed that establishing this group would ensure consistency among the Society's technical standards and develop a broader pool of schema expertise within SAA and in the profession.

MOTION 11

THAT the following charge and description for the Standards Committee’s Technical Subcommittee for Encoded Archival Description be adopted:

Technical Subcommittee for Encoded Archival Description

Purpose
The Technical Subcommittee for Encoded Archival Description (TS-EAD) of the SAA Standards Committee is responsible for overseeing the timely and ongoing intellectual and technical maintenance and development of Encoded Archival Description (EAD).  EAD is the internationally accepted XML (Extensible Markup Language) standard for the transmission of finding aids.  EAD is compatible with ISAD(G): General International Standard Archival Description, 2nd ed. (International Congress on Archives, 1999).  EAD is an SAA-approved standard; documentation is hosted by the Library of Congress at http://www.loc.gov/ead/

To fulfill this mission internationally, the TS-EAD is specifically charged to:

  • Carry out a review of EAD at least every five years and revise as needed.*
  • Revise the EAD tag library and other official documentation as necessary.
  • Promote the understanding and use of EAD internationally.
  • Support educational efforts related to EAD by SAA and international communities.
  • Develop members of the archives profession who are capable of promoting and maintaining EAD over time.
  • Communicate its activities to relevant SAA components and EAD-using communities internationally.
  • Collaborate as needed with the Schema Development Team to maintain the relevant EAD schemas and/or Document Type Definitions (DTDs).

* For this charge, in lieu of a standard review cycle, the TS-EAD shall undertake a revision of EAD 2002, which is to be completed in no more than five years (i.e., by August 2015).

Reporting
The chair (or co-chairs) of the Technical Subcommittee for EAD shall report at least annually to the chair of the SAA Standards Committee on the occasion of the SAA annual meeting.  If extramural funding is obtained by SAA, the chair (or co-chairs) shall provide all necessary narrative reports to the SAA office in order that the reporting requirements of SAA and the funding source are met.

Length of Charge
The TS-EAD shall be charged for five years, beginning February 2010, with the charge expiring at the SAA annual meeting of the fifth year, or until the revision of EAD is completed as described in the “Procedures for Review and Approval of an SAA-Developed Standard,” whichever is shorter.  After the charge is completed, if Encoded Archival Description continues to be an approved standard of SAA, the TS-EAD shall be re-charged for a subsequent review cycle.

Membership
The members and chair(s) of the TS-EAD shall be appointed for the length of time necessary to complete a revision of EAD, which shall not exceed five years.  The technical subcommittee shall have five members who are members of SAA and sufficient international membership to ensure effective representation of EAD professional communities outside the United States.  All members shall demonstrate significant knowledge of and experience with archival description generally, and with EAD specifically.

The TS-EAD shall have a chair who is a member of the Society of American Archivists.  The technical subcommittee is encouraged to have a co-chair from among its international members.

SAA members of the TS-EAD shall be recommended by the Standards Committee for appointment by the Vice President.  International members who are able to represent other professional EAD-using communities effectively shall be appointed at the recommendation of the TS-EAD chair(s), who is/are responsible for ensuring appropriately diverse international representation.  Members and chairs may be reappointed to the TS-EAD for consecutive review cycles, but at least one new SAA member must be appointed per review cycle.

Ex officio members of the Technical Subcommittee for EAD shall include the following if they are not regular members of the subcommittee.

  • Chair of the Standards Committee (or an appointed representative).
  • Chair(s) of the EAC Working Group (or any successor committee).
  • Chair and members of the Schema Development Team.
  • Chair of the EAD Roundtable.
  • Liaison from the Network Development and MARC Standards Office of the Library of Congress.
  • Liaison from OCLC Research.

Communication
The TS-EAD shall carry out its charge primarily via electronic mail, regular mail, and conference calls. It shall meet at the SAA annual meeting and as necessary with funding from SAA or from extramural sources (with prior approval by the SAA Council).

Support Statement:  Creation of the Technical Subcommittee for Encoded Archival Description is an integral step in the process of revising the Society’s standards maintenance procedures.  It also initiates the five-year process of revising EAD.

Fiscal Impact:  Charging the Technical Subcommittee for Encoded Archival Description should have no immediate fiscal impact on the Society.  The work of revising EAD will require fiscal support, either from the Society or from external funding sources (with prior approval by the SAA Council). 

Moved by Cline; seconded by Lawson.  PASSED.

MOTION 12

THAT the following charge and description for the Standards Committee’s Schema Development Team be adopted:

Standards Committee Schema Development Team

Purpose
The Schema Development Team (SDT) of the SAA Standards Committee is responsible for development and editing of all Extensible Markup Language (XML) schemas, Document Type Definitions (DTD), and related technical documents maintained by SAA and its subgroups.  These include the schemas and/or DTDs that express Encoded Archival Description (EAD), Encoded Archival Context – Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families (EAC-CPF), and any other markup standards developed by the Technical Subcommittee for Encoded Archival Description and the Encoded Archival Context Working Group (or any successor groups).

To fulfill its mission as described above, the Schema Development Team is specifically charged to:

  • Carry out, under the direction of the Technical Subcommittee for Encoded Archival Description (TS-EAD) and the EAC Working Group (or any successor group), the maintenance and ongoing development of their respective standards, in accordance with the schedules laid out by their charges and SAA’s “Procedures for Review and Approval of an SAA-Developed Standard.”* 
  • Develop members of the archives profession who have the technical skills necessary to create, develop, and revise XML schemas, DTDs, and related technical documentation.

* All revisions to technical standards must have the approval of the appropriate maintaining body.

Reporting
The chair of the Schema Development Team shall report at least annually to the chairs of the SAA Standards Committee, the TS-EAD, and the EAC Working Group on the occasion of the SAA annual meeting.  If extramural funding is obtained by SAA, the chair shall provide all necessary narrative reports to the SAA office in order that the reporting requirements of SAA and the funding source are met.

Length of Charge
The Schema Development Team shall be charged for one year, beginning February 2010, and continuing through the 2011 SAA annual meeting.  If the Technical Subcommittee for EAD, the EAC Working Group, or another SAA subgroup continues to be engaged in the active development or revision of XML encoding standards, the Schema Development Team shall be recharged annually on the occasion of the SAA annual meeting.  If no SAA subgroup is actively engaged with the development or revision of an XML encoding standard, the Schema Development Team may be discharged.

Membership
The Schema Development Team shall have from three to five members, including a chair, to be recommended by the Standards Committee for appointment by the Vice President.  The chair shall be a member of SAA, but the Schema Development Team should include international members.  The number of members shall vary depending on the STD’s workload.  If additional members are deemed necessary, the chair shall make a recommendation to the Standards Committee.  The members and chair may be reappointed to the Schema Development Team for consecutive terms, but at least one new member must be appointed every five years.  All members shall demonstrate experience with the design and syntax of schemas and/or DTDs.

Ex officio members shall include the following:

  • Chair of the Standards Committee (or an appointed representative).
  • Chair(s) of the Technical Subcommittee for EAD.
  • Chair(s) of the EAC Working Group.
  • Chair of any future SAA group responsible for XML schemas and/or DTDs.

Communication
The Schema Development Team shall carry out its charge primarily via electronic mail, regular mail, and conference calls. It shall meet with the Technical Subcommittee for EAD and the EAC Working Group at the SAA annual meeting and as necessary with funding from SAA or from extramural sources (with prior approval by the SAA Council).

Support Statement:  Creation of the Schema Development Team supports the work of developing, revising, and maintaining technical standards, specifically EAD and EAC-CPF, and aims to expand the schema expertise available within the Society.

Fiscal Impact:  Charging the Schema Development Team should have no immediate fiscal impact on SAA.  The work of revising EAD will require financial support, either from the Society or from external funding sources (with prior approval by the SAA Council). 

Moved by Cline; seconded by Lawson. PASSED.

MOTION 13

THAT the Encoded Archival Description (EAD) Working Group be disbanded with thanks.

Support Statement:  Reorganization of the Standards Committee and revision of its procedures has created a new body, the Technical Subcommittee for Encoded Archival Description, that appropriately replaces the Encoded Archival Description Working Group.

Fiscal Impact:  None.

Moved by Vogt-O’Connor; seconded by Richardson. PASSED.

L.  Extension of DACS Technical Subcommittee

Describing Archives: A Content Standard (DACS) was officially approved by the Society of American Archivists as an SAA standard in March 2005, following review by the Standards Committee, the Technical Subcommittee for Descriptive Standards, and the general archives community.  In October 2006, the Council approved a five-year review cycle for the standard and established the DACS Working Group. Although the DACS Working Group began work on a plan to review, obtain comment on, and revise DACS by the end of 2009, it did not complete its work due both to time pressures on its members and their interest in seeing how DACS might interact with Resource Description and Access (RDA), which “will provide a comprehensive set of guidelines and instructions on resource description and access covering all types of content and media.”  DACS Working Group members are interested in studying how the broad implementation of RDA may have an impact on the way DACS elements map to MARC records as vendors alter systems to accommodate RDA.  Wide adoption of such new systems may alter how SAA reviews and revises DACS.

MOTION 14

THAT the charge of the DACS Working Group (to be renamed the DACS Technical Subcommittee) be extended through May 2010, with the responsibilities of 1) monitoring how Resource Description and Access (RDA) and DACS will interact, 2) pursuing further discussion related to the revision with the RDA implementation groups (The Library of Congress, the British Library, Library and Archives Canada, and the National Library of Australia), and  3) coordinating with interested professional groups and subgroups (possibly including, but not limited to, the American Library Association’s Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access [CC:DA], the ALA’s Committee on Machine-Readable Recording of Bibliographic Information [MARBI], and the International Council on Archives Committee on Descriptive Standards);

THAT the DACS Technical Subcommittee be repopulated; and

THAT the DACS Technical Subcommittee work with the Standards Committee to draft recommendations for Council consideration in May 2010 for a new technical subcommittee charge and timeline for review and maintenance of DACS.

Support Statement:  Given the importance of DACS within the archives community, it is appropriate that the group charged with its review and maintenance be fully aware of other developing standards that may have an impact on DACS.  The group best prepared to comment on the potential “interaction” of DACS and RDA is the current DACS Working Group (to be renamed DACS Technical Subcommittee if Standards Committee recommendations in Agenda Item 0210-III-J-StdsCommMission are adopted by the Council).

Fiscal Impact:  Nominal; the DACSTS may hold one or more conference calls to coordinate work and/or to discuss report recommendations.

Moved by Frusciano; seconded by Vogt-O’Connor.  PASSED.

IV.B. Defining Diversity (Discussion item, taken out of order.)

At its August 2009 meeting, the SAA Council adopted a revised Desired Outcome #4 for the Diversity Priority:  “SAA will define diversity, develop new programs, and enhance existing programs that promote diversity as a value while fostering an organizational environment of inclusiveness.” The Executive Committee, the SAA staff, the Diversity Committee, and the Council discussed how and why SAA would define diversity, what the role of the Diversity Committee would be in such a task, who would be approached for comment, and how to tackle concerns that accompany answering a question with such a daunting scope.  The Council began the process of developing a statement about what “achieving diversity” might mean, and agreed to continue to refine the statement and seek member input following the Council meeting.

M.  Change in Composition of Diversity Committee
           
Promoting diversity of the archival record and of the profession is one of the Society’s top three strategic priorities. In addition to serving as an advisory group to the SAA Council, the Diversity Committee “functions as a catalyst for new diversity-related initiatives, developed in coordination with various SAA entities, and monitors, evaluates, advocates for, and reports on matters pertaining to the diversity of archival practitioners and documentation.” SAA’s Diversity Committee should be, in both name and practice, the “go to” group for coordination of diversity initiatives. Recognizing that multiple groups within SAA are regarded as having an expressed and/or special interest in such matters, the Committee proposed a revision of its composition.

MOTION 15

THAT Section II of the Diversity Committee’s description in the Council Handbook be revised as follows, effective August 14, 2010 [strikethrough = delete, underline = add]:

II. Committee Selection, Size, and Length of Terms
The committee consists of twelve seven members. Six members, including the chair, who are appointed by the SAA Vice President/President-Elect. The chair serves a two-year term. Committee members, including the chair, serve staggered three-year terms, with four two appointments occurring annually. The chair of the Membership Committee serves as an ex officio member.
In order to provide representation to special-interest groups having an explicit interest in diversity, five seats on the committee shall be designated for members of the following SAA roundtables and shall be appointed by the Vice President/President-Elect in consultation with each roundtable’s elected chair:

  • Archivists & Archives of Color Roundtable
  • Latin American & Caribbean Cultural Heritage Archives Roundtable
  • Lesbian & Gay Archives Roundtable
  • Native American Archives Roundtable
  • Women Archivists Roundtable and Women's Collections Roundtable
    (This is a joint seat appointed in consultation with both roundtable chairs.)

Support Statement: Designating seats on the Diversity Committee to roundtables that have an explicit stake in this issue—and from whom the Council is generally inclined to seek input—will help ensure that the Committee has the requisite representation to function as a diverse advisory body and to fulfill its mission. This recommendation was reviewed and approved by the current members of the Diversity Committee.

Fiscal Impact:  None.

Moved by Cline, seconded by Lawson. PASSED (with 5 approving,  4 opposed, Ambacher abstaining).

N.1. Diversity Committee: Pursuing a Diversity Grant Proposal

The Diversity Committee sought permission to pursue a 21st Century Librarian Grant from the Institute for Museum and Library Services (December 15, 2010, application deadline).  The proposed grant would provide internships/fellowships for minority students to gain practical, hands-on experience in an archives setting.

MOTION 16

THAT the SAA Diversity Committee, working in conjunction with SAA staff and with review by the Executive Committee prior to submission, pursue a 21st Century Librarian Grant from the Institute for Museum and Library Services (December 15, 2010, grant proposal deadline) for the purpose of funding internships/fellowships for minority students to gain practical, hands-on experience in an archives setting.

Support Statement: The proposed internships/fellowships for minority students would directly address the goals promoted in SAA’s Diversity strategic priority.

Fiscal Impact: To be determined based on need to compensate one or more grant writers.

Moved by Hyry; seconded by Frusciano. PASSED.

N.2. Diversity Committee:  Diversity Survey

The Diversity Committee sought permission from the SAA Council to develop and implement a survey of the SAA membership for the purpose of ascertaining member understanding of, attitudes about, and desires for professional action concerning diversity. The Diversity Committee would design the survey (probably with professional assistance), interpret the results, and report on the results to the Council.  The Council discussion addressed the challenges associated with fielding a comprehensive survey, and Council Liaison Deborra Richardson was asked to follow up with the Committee to 1) obtain additional information about the questions that might be asked and 2) suggest that it may be most appropriate to target the survey to questions about what professional actions or educational tools may be most needed by members.

O.  Task Force on 75th Anniversary

Formed in November 2009, the 75th Anniversary Task Force is responsible for coordinating a multi-faceted approach to planning and implementing a celebration of the Society’s 75th Anniversary in 2011.  The Task Force noted that it has explored a range of ideas for marketing and celebrating the anniversary and for putting the occasion to use for SAA and the profession from a public relations standpoint.   The Task Force had adopted the following Vision and Mission statements for its work:

Vision Statement

Provide leadership in crafting a celebration of SAA’s 75th Anniversary that:

  • Expands in SAA members 1) knowledge of the growth of the archives profession in the United States as represented in and led by SAA and 2) an appreciation of what the historical development means to us today and portends for the future of archives,
  • Engages the membership as broadly as possible in the occasion through offering multiple forms of celebration, and
  • Contributes to the work of SAA, its constituent groups, and other archives groups in marketing and growing the archival enterprise.

Mission Statement

Develop and encourage events grounded in history in each of the categories of:

  • Serious history
  • Advocacy/marketing/outreach
  • Fun
  • Fundraising

MOTION 17

THAT the 75th Anniversary Task Force, working with the SAA Treasurer and staff, develop an itemized activity budget for inclusion in the Draft FY 2011 SAA budget to be presented to the Council at its May 2010 meeting; and

THAT the Task Force include in its May 2010 report to the Council a summary of planned activities, estimated indirect expenses (staff time), and anticipated sources of new revenue to support 75th Anniversary activities.

Support Statement:  Many good ideas for celebrating SAA’s 75th Anniversary are in the early stages of development.  Creation of a draft budget, with review by the SAA Council, will ensure that all parties are aware of the resources needed for various activities and that appropriate funding is allocated for such activities.

Fiscal Impact:  None.

Moved by Felker; seconded by Hyry. PASSED.

P.  Change in Criteria for Fellowship

During its deliberations in 2008-2009, the Committee to Select SAA Fellows (comprising the five most recent past presidents of SAA as well as three Council appointees) encountered several issues requiring clarification from the SAA Council and from the membership.  The first issue dealt with the eligibility of primary contacts of institutional members to be nominated and elected as SAA Fellows. Changing the eligibility of primary contacts to be nominated and elected as SAA Fellows required a change to the SAA Constitution, a change that can only be approved by the membership. The second issue was similar, but related to the eligibility of associate members. This also required a membership vote to change the SAA Constitution. The third issue sought clarification on who can nominate Fellows, which was an action within the purview of the Council.

MOTION 18


THAT the SAA Council propose to the membership, for consideration at the August 16, 2010, Annual Membership Meeting, an amendment to the SAA Constitution reflecting the following:

Primary contacts of SAA institutional members are eligible to be nominated as Fellows.  As with individual members, primary contacts must have been so designated for seven years immediately prior to their nomination in order to be eligible.  A combination of seven years as an individual member or primary contact will be acceptable to meet this requirement.

Support Statement: 
This change will remedy the current situation in which primary contacts have all of the rights of individual membership, including the right to hold appointed or elected SAA office, except the right to be named an SAA Fellow.  It removes a seeming inconsistency that is difficult to explain and allows the Committee to Select SAA Fellows to judge each nomination on its merits.

Fiscal Impact:  The fiscal impact could be significant if a system reconfiguration is required, and unclear in terms of staff time if SAA must develop a manual way of tracking primary contacts’ continuous status. 

Moved by Vogt-O’Connor; seconded by Frusciano. PASSED (with Sly abstaining).

MOTION 19

THAT the SAA Council propose to the membership, for consideration at the August 16, 2010, Annual Membership Meeting, an amendment to the SAA Constitution reflecting the following: 

Foreign associate members who are engaged in archival work but whose primary affiliation is as individual members in their own national archival associations are eligible to be elected as SAA Fellows.  Foreign associate members must have held this membership, or full individual membership, for the seven years immediately prior to their nomination.  American associate members are not eligible to be SAA Fellows.

Support Statement:  SAA should be able to honor foreign associate members who have made a substantial contribution to the Society or to the archives profession.  Such members regularly attend SAA meetings in addition to the meetings of their own national associations.

Fiscal Impact:  None.

Moved by Lawson; seconded by Vogt-O’Connor. PASSED.

MOTION 20

THAT the charge of the Committee to Select SAA Fellows be revised to reflect the following: 

Individual members, primary contacts of institutional members, student members, and associate members are eligible to nominate SAA Fellows.

Support Statement:  This clarification would have assisted the 2008-2009 committee when a primary contact of an institutional member (formerly an individual member) nominated a Fellow candidate.  The lack of clarity on this point raised questions regarding whether the nomination was eligible.  This change will also make it easier on the SAA staff doing “background checks” on nominations.

Fiscal Impact:  None.

Moved by Settles; seconded by Cline. PASSED.

Q. Creation of Committee of Past Presidents
 
Past Presidents Elizabeth Adkins, Frank Boles, and Mark Greene had recommended that the Council create a standing committee of past presidents – made up of the three immediate past presidents – to serve as an advisory group to the current president, the executive director, and the Nominating Committee.  Their recommendation noted that SAA has no formal mechanism through which the opinion(s) of recent past presidents can be formally sought or through which recent past presidents can easily offer collective advice and counsel on Society matters that they believe are important.

MOTION 21

THAT a new standing committee, the Committee of Past Presidents, be created with the following charge and description:

I. Purpose

The Committee of Past Presidents (COPP) serves as an advisory board by addressing issues that its members believe are of importance to the Society or which they are asked to address by the current president.  It also serves in an advisory capacity to the Nominating Committee.

II.  Committee Selection, Size, and Length of Terms
The Committee of Past Presidents consists of the three immediate past presidents of the Society. The past president who has most recently held the office of president serves as chair.

III.  Duties and Responsibilities

  1. The committee serves as an advisory body to the current president, responding to such inquiries as may be directed to it.  Such inquiries may encompass any issues of significance to the Society for which the recent governance experience or other professional expertise of committee members is relevant.  With the consent of the current president, the committee may consult directly with the executive director.
  2. The committee may periodically approach the current president on issues that committee members feel it would be wise to discuss.  In this role, the committee may simply suggest the importance of a particular issue, or it may present anything from an informal thought piece to a more formal white paper to a request for Council action.
  3. The committee serves as an advisory body to the Nominating Committee, with particular interest regarding individuals suggested as nominees for the positions of vice president, treasurer, and member of Council.  The purpose of this advisory capacity is to help ensure that broad representation of the Society’s institutional memory be brought to bear on potential nominations.

IV. Reporting Procedures

The committee will report to the president on an as-needed basis. The committee will annually consult with the chair of the Nominating Committee regarding nominees and offer such advice as it deems helpful or as is requested by the Nominating Committee.

In order to retain familiarity with SAA issues, the committee members will have access to information identical to that of seated Council members.  On certain occasions, either the current president or the committee will request committee access to information shared in Council executive sessions.  Granting such requests will be the privilege of the Council sitting in executive session.

Support Statement:  Past SAA presidents possess substantial, important, and unique pieces of SAA’s institutional memory.  Creation of the Committee of Past Presidents provides an institutional mechanism through which current leaders and decision makers in the Society may have ready access to the institutional knowledge found among past presidents.

Fiscal Impact:  None.

Moved by Felker; seconded by Cline. DEFEATED (with six opposing, Frusciano and Vogt-O’Connor abstaining, Tibbo and Ambacher absent).

R.  Other Action Items from Council Members

Felker noted that she had just learned that Institute of Certified Records Managers (ICRM) Chairman and Immediate Past President Alan Andolsen had passed away on January 24, 2010.  She proposed that the Council consider a resolution honoring Andolsen.

MOTION 22

THAT the SAA Council adopt the following resolution honoring recently deceased professional colleague Alan Andolsen:

SAA Council Resolution Honoring Alan Andolsen, CRM

WHEREAS Alan Andolsen made outstanding contributions to the Records and Information Management profession in the areas of managing digital records developing methodologies, professional standards and ethical issues facing records managers;

WHEREAS Alan Andolsen served the Records and Information Management profession in numerous capacities, including most recently as the Chair of the ICRM Board, a senior advisor to the Institute, and previously as ICRM President where he directed the revision to the ICRM’s leadership succession structure and branding strategy, the creation of the its Internet portal and increased the number of Certified Records Managers;

WHEREAS Alan Andolsen provided professional consulting services to numerous organizations and archives, including the International Monetary Fund’s five-year Modernization of the Archives project, Motorola Systems Solutions Group’s digital records management program, McGraw-Hill’s records retention initiatives, and the Delaware River Port Authority’s uniform file classification system.

WHEREAS Alan Andolsen contributed to the professional literature and graduate archival education curricula;

WHEREAS Alan Andolsen was a forward looking professional who was committed to service, standards and willing to share his time and expertise with others in  order to sustain the future of the information management profession.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT The Society of American Archivists recognizes and honors Alan Andolsen for his contributions to the intellectual advancement of the archives and records management profession.

Support Statement: Alan Andolsen was a consummate professional who was forward looking, knowledgeable, committed to service and standards, and willing to share his time and expertise with others.

Fiscal Impact:  None.

Moved by Lawson; seconded by Sly.  DEFEATED (with three in favor, six abstaining, Tibbo absent).

 

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 4
           
IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS

Haitian Earthquake (New item added to agenda by Executive Committee on February 1.)

Council members discussed SAA’s response to the magnitude 7.0 earthquake in Haiti on January 12, 2010. Gottlieb reported that SAA Past President Maygene Daniels would be representing SAA at a meeting of the U.S. Committee of the Blue Shield, along with other concerned organizations, on February 5, 2010, in Washington. SAA committed to becoming a conduit of information for members regarding relief efforts and opportunities to assist in the recovery of Haitian cultural heritage.

A.  Mandated Periodic Review of SAA Dues

The Governance Manual specifies that the Council will review SAA’s dues structure every three years to modify it as necessary. The most recent review commenced in January 2006 and brought resolutions approved by the membership that took effect on January 1, 2008.  Prior to 2008, the most recent review and modification to SAA dues occurred in 1997. In August 2009, the Council established a new Finance Committee charged to “(assist) the Council in meeting its fiduciary responsibilities by: monitoring the financial health of the organization, ensuring that its assets are protected, and providing advice and counsel to the SAA Treasurer and the Council on financial matters, including the investment program.” Council members agreed that the Finance Committee should conduct the mandated review of SAA dues and present recommendations for consideration at the May 2010 meeting.

B.  Defining Diversity (Moved to follow item III.L.)      

C.  90-Day Membership Grace Period

SAA conducted general elections via an online ballot for the first time in 2009. In the course of configuring the electronic voting system, staff discovered a discrepancy between a policy in SAA’s Constitution (which allows dues to be 90 days in arrears before membership is canceled) and current administrative practice (which cancels member status approximately one month after the dues expiration date).  The Council charged staff to bring office procedures into compliance with the Constitution and also discussed the feasibility of proposing a Constitutional amendment to rectify this long-standing discrepancy.

D.  Joint Annual Meeting Schedule and Planning

(See Executive Director’s Report at V.E.5.) Beaumont summarized progress on program development and the conference schedule for ARCHIVES*RECORDS/DC 2010, reported that exhibit and sponsorship sales were much ahead of what they were at this point in 2009 due to a special time-limited discount offer, and updated the status of conference promotion activities. Her report also included two draft versions of the schedule (one based on the Austin 2009 schedule and one based on the DC 2006 schedule).  Among the multiple challenging aspects of developing the conference schedule, Beaumont indicated concerns about having a sufficient number of rooms for SAA, CoSA, and NAGARA governance meetings on Wednesday and Thursday and sufficient time to “turn” rooms between meetings. She also noted that the entire conference schedule may have to change at the last minute, depending on whether prominent invitees accept our invitations to speak at the plenaries.

E.  Council Exemplary Service Award Ideas

Created in 1980, this award is given on an occasional basis at the discretion of the Council or upon recommendation to the Council by the Awards Committee.  The Council discussed potential recipients for 2010 and several Council members volunteered to draft nominations for the Council’s consideration between meetings.

F.  Scholarship to Modern Archives Institute

In November 2009, the treasurer of the Colonial Dames of America, Chapter III, Washington, D.C., indicated in a telephone call initiated by SAA that CDA will no longer support the scholarship to the National Archives and Records Administration’s Modern Archives Institute (MAI).  Established in 1974, the CDA scholarship has been part of the SAA awards program for 35 years. CDA funded the summer 2009 institute but has indicated that it will no longer do so for the winter 2010 institute and forward.

MOTION 22

The Society of American Archivists notes with regret that the Colonial Dames of America, Chapter III, Washington, DC, has discontinued support for the Modern Archives Institute (MAI) scholarship awarded to SAA member(s). SAA thanks the CDA for its support of archives education over the past 35 years and notes that the scholarship for the Modern Archives Institute will be discontinued, effective with the Summer 2009 Institute.
           
Moved by Lawson; seconded by Hyry. PASSED (with Richardson abstaining).

V. REPORTS
           
A.  Executive Committee

In a formal report, Sly noted all actions taken by the Council via formal online discussion and voting processes between August 2009 and January 2010. Issues brought to the Executive Committee, including appointments, advocacy discussions and decisions, personnel changes, and a potential new award, were included in the report.
           
B.  President 

Gottlieb detailed activities undertaken during his first four months as SAA President, including monitoring the confirmation of David Ferriero as 10th Archivist of the United States, revising the strategic plan, reviewing and responding to the American Library Association’s sixth draft of its statement on traditional cultural expressions, and guiding several Council and Executive Committee decisions on other business.

C.  Vice President / President-Elect

Tibbo’s written report described her work on the 75th Anniversary Task Force, preparations to make appointments, and advocacy efforts regarding PAHR co-sponsorship. She had attended in partnership with Beaumont the American Society of Association Executives’ Symposium for Chief Elected Officers and Chief Staff Executives, an event focused on improving communication and understanding among CEOs, CSEs, and members within membership organizations. 

D.  Treasurer’s Report   

Felker presented a financial review of SAA’s performance from July 1, 2009, through December 31, 2009, indicating that although the Society’s net gain was ahead of FY09 and budget (due largely to investments income), FY10 would be challenging operationally. Although Annual Meeting revenues exceeded expectations, Publications and Workshops revenues fell significantly short of budget and Membership revenues lagged slightly behind past years and budget. Year-to-date total expenses were less than FY09, but still slightly over budget.  As SAA’s academic and government clients continue to wrestle with significant budget cuts, as the stock market continues to recover, and as SAA’s other sources of non-dues revenue experience declines, the report noted that the Society’s challenge will be to hold the line on expenses.

E. Staff Reports

1.  Executive Director: Beaumont summarized Headquarters activities since August 2009.  Strategic-priority-directed activities included working with Gottlieb and the Executive Committee to revise the strategic plan document and reflect on options for further development of the public awareness strategic priority; implementing a rigorous effort to publicize the Mosaic Scholarship; conducting advocacy work on behalf of PAHR; serving on the National Coalition for History personnel appraisal team; meeting with Association of Canadian Archivists representatives, with a representative from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, with ALA’s Preservation Week planning group, and with Gottlieb and Ferriero; staffing meetings of the DC 2010 Program Committee and the 75th Anniversary Task Force; attending ASAE’s CEO Symposium with Tibbo; directing SAA staff personnel changes; monitoring the budget; working on the 2009 Annual Appeal; negotiating contracts for the 2012 and 2013 Annual Meetings; and participating in a  website usability study.

2. Membership:  Doyle reported that membership had been declining from an all-time high of 5,600 in March 2009 because of the economic recession.  As of December 31, 2009, SAA had a total membership of 5,438, with  4,884 individual members and 554 institutional members.  

3. Education:  De Sutter provided a fiscal-year-to-date update on workshops (31 face-to-face programs with 547 attendees, 10 new program topics, 6 new co-sponsors), as well as plans for professional development offerings through Fall 2010. The two Web seminars – one on Web 2.0 and the other on how to become an archives consultant – attracted 28 sites/168 participants and 62 sites/102 participants, respectively. Her work also included constructing and disseminating a survey with the Electronic Records Section Steering Committee and the Education Committee; and coordination with several other organizations and one coalition on grant submissions and on pre-conference workshops, all resulting in seven (not-yet-scheduled) SAA workshops to be offered in FY10 and in workshops at several regional meetings.
 
4. Publications:  Brinati indicated that as of the halfway point in FY 2010 (December 31), the Publications program was running behind its revenue goals. Several publishing projects slated to make contributions to FY10 did not do so, and one of the authors asked to be released from a contract.  To contain expenses, the mid-year meetings in Chicago of both the Editorial and Publications Boards were canceled. Brinati summarized new publications, the status of manuscripts, and other projects in the pipeline with availability projected across the next several years on such topics as archives and the digital age, archives for librarians, diversity, exhibits, personal collections in the digital era, processing, processing management, religious archives, succeeding in a small repository, Waldo Gifford Leland, Web 2.0, and women’s archives. The report also noted that two areas of the website point to e-content: ePublications and Proceedings. A new online bookstore was launched in December, and 80 back issues of the American Archivist—from 1970 through 1989—were slated to be posted to the MetaPress site, with more on the way in the spring and summer of 2010.

5. Annual Meeting: See Agenda Item IV.A.   

6. SAA Website: Doyle provided a written update on the Drupal site development, indicating that after personnel-driven delays at SAA’s member database vendor, progress on communication functions involving Drupal began in earnest in November 2009. SAA staff reviewed an incomplete alpha site in September 2009, generating many requests to change site navigation. The alpha site that was re-released to staff on January 20, 2010, featured a variety of enhancements intended to improve member leader, member/nonmember/ constituent, and internal/external communications. Release of the beta site was scheduled for the first week of February 2010, followed by quality assurance testing and launch later in the month. Doyle acknowledged that multiple launch dates published to the membership have been announced and missed because the complexity of the tasks associated with the project was significantly underestimated.   
                  
F.  American Archivist Editor

In a written report, Editor Mary Jo Pugh summarized activities associated with the American Archivist from August 2009 to January 2010, including: Bastian’s agreement to complete a sixth year as reviews editor; the appointment of Amy Cooper Cary as new reviews editor and Danna Bell-Russel as associate reviews editor; detail of the plans to publish a special issue in Fall/Winter 2011 marking SAA’s 75th Anniversary; announcement of a readership survey to be distributed in March; progress of the American Archivist digitization project; and activities of the editor at the 2009 Annual Meeting, in the production processes for Fall/Winter 2009 and Spring/Summer 2010, and in the process of selecting a new reviews editor.

G.  Publications Editor 
           
Editor Peter Wosh provided a written summary of activities since the last Council meeting in August, including: modifications in SAA’s author contracts to make them more author-friendly; the launch of several new publications at the Annual Meeting (Archives Power, Archival and Special Collections Facilities, The Interactive Archivist); the upcoming availability of Preserving Archives and Manuscripts; upcoming book projects; enriched e-publications; planning for the next iteration of the Archival Fundamentals Series; his work with new authors, including review of individual book chapters; his representation of SAA at a JSTOR meeting; his participation in discussions about the upcoming SAA anniversary; and preparation of prefatory material for several new publications.

H.  Diversity Committee 

Diversity Committee Chair Terry Baxter’s report noted that the Committee had met twice via conference call and once in person at the 2009 Annual Meeting.  He provided a summary of activities, including: providing comments on the SAA Draft Strategic Priority Outcomes and Activities, FY 2010 - FY2013; recommending that the composition of the Diversity Committee be changed (see Agenda Item III.M.); providing comments on the American Library Association’s “Traditional Cultural Expressions” document; and conducting Committee discussions about refining demographic information in SAA’s database and on member concerns about political diversity within SAA.

I.   Diversity Committee / Native American Archives Roundtable: Native American Protocols Forum Annual Report
           
Diversity Committee Chair Terry Baxter summarized the process used and discussion undertaken at the 2009 Forum, noting the successful use of a talking stick during discussions both as a tool for understanding what the Protocols were about as well as a tool for structuring conversation.  Of 45 attendees, at least 22 individuals made at least one comment.   He presented the following distillation of comments as representative of the meeting, and noted that more detailed notes are available upon request.

  • Many museums and archives already have the best practices outlined in the Protocols in place.  The Protocols represent an affirmation of relationship building and diplomacy.
  • There are still questions about the impact of the Protocols. Will there be mandatory repatriation of existing collections?  How do the Protocols affect past collecting and copyright?  How should contact be made with tribes and with whom?  Whose property is it? 
  • The focus on dialog and collaboration wove through several comment threads. How best can we begin a dialog?  Consider the resurging interest in documentation strategies by cooperating from the forefront and avoiding adversarial relationships.  Construct formal and informal networks.
  • Continued focus on education (both formal and informal) in achieving the Protocols aims. Educate non-American Indian archivists about how to make contact:  express humility, observe first, think and act slowly, provide space, practice patience. Work with non-indigenous populations to educate, to construct a shared memory.  How do we address job turnover . . . creating a climate for long-term sustainability of communication?
  • The issues cross both professional (see TCE above) and geographic boundaries.  “The 49th parallel is an artificial product of the ‘settler society.’”
  • Significant issues related to rights. Who has the right to represent a community?  Each community is unique, with many levels of complexity.  Who can speak for a community?  Who do you ask?  What happens when there are disagreements or differences within a Native American community?
  • “Trust, respect, listening.  It is part of my job.  Who could know more about the records [but the community of origin]?”  Learning more is fun.

J.   2009 Program Committee:  Diversity

Submitted as an addendum to earlier reports of the 2009 Program Committee, Duffy and Felker’s written report discussed the diversity represented on the Committee itself and in the program sessions. Among other points, the co-chairs indicated that while diversity was a constant theme of the Committee’s discussions in terms of how to bring new and representative voices to the table, the tools to measure the outcome efficiently were not available.
           
K.  Committee on Ethics and Professional Conduct Annual Report
           
The Committee reported on its work developing and proposing several education sessions and forums involving ethics, social justice, global issues, and SAA’s Code of Ethics. The report also detailed ongoing work on the Committee’s review of SAA’s Code of Ethics and the recommendation submitted to the Council (Agenda Item III.H.).

L.  Standards Committee Annual Report

Standards Committee Chair Polly Reynolds submitted an annual report detailing new leaders; completed projects (such as Annual Meeting session endorsements, the Facilities Guidelines standard, and the  Orphan Works statement of best practice); ongoing activities (such as review and revision of the Committee’s mission statement, deaccessioning guidelines, the Functions Thesaurus, the memorandum of understanding with ARMA, the Technology Best Practices Task Force, and how the revised mission affects DACS/EAD/RDA/EAC subgroups); new projects, such as development of a standards portal on the SAA website; and diversity initiatives. Appendixes included eight working group, task force, subcommittee, or representatives’ reports.

M.  Intellectual Property Working Group 

Chair Heather Briston provided a written summary of IPWG activities, including its work on developing and publicizing the Orphan Works Best Practices document (available on the SAA website), its comments on the American Library Association’s “Traditional Cultural Expressions” document; and current work on Author’s Rights Agreements regarding monographs, ARSC pre-1972 sound recordings, and developing an advocacy agenda to promote the archives perspective in intellectual property legislation.  The group’s proposed work plan for the coming year includes developing session proposal ideas, providing easier access to the IPWG website, liaising with the Cultural Property Working Group (when appointed), updating the Orphan Works document annually, and monitoring copyright legislation.  The group gratefully acknowledged receipt of the Council Exemplary Service Award.

N.  Government Affairs Working Group 

No report was submitted.  The Council will consider ways in which to stimulate the group’s activity.
           
O.  Joint Task Force on Preserving the American Historical Record

Council Liaison Brenda Lawson reported on the activities of the Task Force, noting that as reported in August 2009, the major push of the Joint Task Force has been to obtain co-sponsors for the House legislation. Task Force Chair Kathleen Roe has been the driving force in drafting and placing promotional messages to CoSA and SAA members at least monthly throughout the fall and winter.

P.  Task Force on Developing a Statement of Core Values for Archivists

Council Liaison Rosalye Settles submitted a written progress report on the activities of the group from August 2009 through December 2009. During this period, Task Force members examined Mark Greene’s list of archival values (per his 2008 Presidential Address) as well as values statements and similar documents from related professional associations. An early draft of a Values Statement is scheduled to be submitted for the Council’s review at the May 2010 Council Meeting.

Q.  Representatives’ Annual Reports (Compiled) 

Per Section XI. of the Governance Manual, official representatives are expected to complete an annual report. Council members reviewed reports received from SAA’s official representatives to the following groups:  ALA Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access (Lisa Carter); International Council on Archives Section on Professional Associations (Trudy Huskamp Peterson); International Council on Archives Committee on Descriptive Standards (Claire Sibille); and National Information Standards Organization (Kathleen Dow).
           
R.  Section / Roundtable Annual Reports (Compiled) 

Per Sections IX. and X. of the Governance Manual, Sections and Roundtables are required to complete annual reports.  Council members reviewed the compiled reports, which also are available on the SAA website at http://www.archivists.org/governance/annualreports/Component.asp.

VI. COUNCIL BUSINESS
           
A.  Review of February 2010 “To Do” List

Council members reviewed the draft list of action items stemming from the meeting.
           
B.  Review of February 2010 “Talking Points”

Council members reviewed the group’s decisions made at the meeting.
           
C.  Adjournment

Settles moved and Vogt-O’Connor seconded a motion to adjourn. PASSED. The Council meeting was adjourned at 12:32 p.m.

 

Approved by the SAA Council on March 23, 2010.