and find out if they have a disaster preparedness plan in place. Choose two,
identify their main characteristics and compare them.
I chose to look at the disaster preparedness of the conservation department at the National Archives and Cornell University.
Both institutions are first and foremost concerned with the safety of the employees before any of the collection materials although the National Archives had step by step actions to take in cases of:
Each department, unit or library should identify those parts of library(http://www.library.cornell.edu/preservation/emergencies/ word doc.)
collections which must be protected or salvaged first after an emergency. On the
attached form, list, in order of priority, those library materials, records and collections which should be salvaged first. Along with this priority list, attach a floor plan indicated locations of fire extinguishers, alarms, etc. It is best to list in detail what the collection priorities are in an appendix. Establishing priorities within collections is equally important (e.g. call numbers of specific items within collections). Consider the following points in establishing priorities What is the monetary and intrinsic value of the collection as a whole or its individual items? How fragile is the material? (e.g. brittle, unbound issues of serial, etc.) How vulnerable is the material to damage from a disaster? (e.g. location, under pipes, near water Is the material replaceable? Can the majority of items be replaced in the same or a different format, such as microfilm? What are the economics of replacing items? Which materials can be replaced more economically than they can be salvaged? The estimated average replacement of a monograph is currently $75.00. What are the costs of de-accessioning materials? What materials can be discarded instead of salvaged? What are the legal requirements, if any, for retention of documents/material? Why is preservation of this material critical? The relative importance of collections, to university programs. In addition to the collections, what other items are valuable (e.g. catalog, shelflist, computer terminals.)
I like the idea of obtaining input from those who know most about particular collections. This way a little bit of everything can be saved first. The plan seems to have enough structure in it to guide the staff but enough flexibility to be helpful to everyone.
Overall I would say that the National Archives disaster preparedness relies on hands on drills of procedures while Cornell has a more traditional preparedness manuals. Both realize that human life is more important than material objects. The National Archives appears to deal with materials that are in more need of rescue or are in more immediate danger while Cornell relies on curators/conservators to list what is most important and irreplaceable.
Cassandra,
ReplyDeleteDo you think it plausible that the National Archives Disaster Preparedness Plan is more involved/thorough because of their position in the archival world? A different way to say this would be do you think the National Archives went further in their plan because they are aware other institutions look to them for leadership in an array of areas, including disaster preparedness?