DOCUMENTING

COMMONWEALTI

ONE TOWN

AT A TIME

BY ANGELA REDDIN

Archivists often wrestle over the issue ofdocumentation. Whether it be the pursuit of anintellectual problem, the strengthening of a colleciing policy, or the improvement of an institutionstate's, or nation's documentary heritage, documentis a daunting task. Frankly, it is one of the most ctasks we as records caretakers must address. Hplan to document a community, a people. a state,How do we systematically handle the materials weour care while developing and implementing a plantonllLtJlAn - -nr mInanlmnniL nf nIt1nftI1nV ra l[,UII[.,LLIUII tlllU Illtllldgll~[,11,ll. 01 pUt[.lltltlllf ¥alUaUl~. ItbUI, ..kl -: \-

Massachusetts is attempting to address the issue one town at a time.There are over 1,200 historical records repositories in the

Commonwealth. This number does not include the 351 town andcity governments, (now terminated) counties, (new) regional gov-ernments, state government agencies, public libraries, schools, andmany other large research repositories to which the Commonwealthis home. Each of these repositories holds valuable documents. In- -wdependently, each has records significant to their community and '.their institution; together, they hold the historical wealth of the state .and a piece of our national heritage. -'

In the recent Strategic Planning project conducted by theMassachusetts Historical Records Advisory Board (MHRAB),funded by a grant from the National Historical Publications andRecords Commission (NHPRC), the board identified five prior-ities to improve the current condition of historical records inMassachusetts. Priority four was to "plan for the adequate docu-mentation of Massachusetts history."

To test this priority, MHRAB carried out a series of demonstra-tion projects. MHRAB, with work done by Kathryn HammondBaker. recommended that the historical records community takefour steps towards preserving an equitable and comprehensiverecord of Massachusetts life: ( c o ,,n t i n u e a o ,i p g e 1 8 )

The Massachusetts fishingand whaling industries havebeen of major significanceto many communities, afactor represented in thestate's documentary her-itage. These are stereoscopeimages of Provincetownand Cape Cod, ca. 1895-1908. Courtesy of thePilgrim Monument andProvincetown Museum.

Annotation is the quarterly newsletter of the NationalHistorical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC),a federal agency within the National Archives and RecordsAdministration in Washington, DC. Recipients are en-couraged to republish, with appropriate credit, any materi-als appearing in Annotation. Inquiries about receivingAnnotation, submitting material for it, or anything elserelated to it may be directed to the Editor, Annotation,NHPRC, National Archives and Records Administration,700 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Room I 11, Washington,DC 20408-0001, (202) 501-5610 (voice); (202)501-5601(fax); nhprc@archl.nara.gov (e-mail); www. nara. gov/naralnhprc/ (World Wide Web).

Material accepted for publication will be edited to con-form to style and space limitations of Annotation, butauthors will be consulted should substantive questionsarise. The editor is final arbiter in matters regarding lengthand grammar. Published material does not necessarily rep-resent the views of the Commission or of the NationalArchives and Records Administration; indeed, some mate-rial may challenge policies and practices of those institu-tions.

NHPRC MEMBERS - John W. Carlin, Archivist of the

United States, Chairperson; Roy D. Blunt, representing the

U.S. House of Representatives; Nicholas C. Burckel and

Marvin F. "Bud" Moss, representing the President of the

United States; William H. Chafe, representing the

Organization of American Historians; Charles T. Cullen,

representing the Association for Documentary Editing;

Mary Maples Dunn, representing the American Historical

Association; Brent D. Glass, representing the American

Association for State and Local History; Alfred Goldberg,

representing the Department of Defense; Margaret P.

Grafeld, representing the Department of State; James M.

Jeffords, representing the U.S. Senate; Anne R. Kenney,

representing the Society of American Archivists; Howard

Lowell, representing the National Association of Govern-

ment Archives and Records Administrators; David H.

Souter, representing the U.S. Supreme Court; and Winston

Tabb, representing the Librarian of Congress.

NHPRC STAFF - Ann C. Newhall, Executive Director;

Roger A. Bruns, Deputy Executive Director; Richard A.

Cameron, Director for State Programs; Timothy D.W.

Connelly. Director for Publications; Mark Conrad,

Director for Technology Initiatives; Nancy Taylor Copp,

Management and Program Analyst; Mary A. Giunta,

Director for Communications and Outreach; J. Dane

Hartgrove, Historian and Editor, Annotation; Laurette

O'Connor, Grant Program Assistant; Cassandra A. Scott.

Staff Assistant; Daniel A. Stokes, Program Officer.

The theme of this issue of Annotation is Commission support for archival and

records management efforts by the states in the form of strategic planning grants

and regrant projects.

We begin this issue with Angela Reddin's article on the recent strategic plan-

ning project conducted by the Massachusetts Historical Records Advisory Board

(MHRAB). We follow with a piece by Nancy Richard and Joan D. Krizack of

Northeastern University that demonstrates how the principles set forth in

MHRAB's strategic plan can be applied in preserving the records of underdocu-

mented elements of an urban population, in this case Boston's African-American,

Chinese, gay and lesbian, and Latino communities.

We continue our coverage of state strategic planning initiatives with an article

excerpted from "The NHPRC Planning Initiative: An Evaluation," a report pre-

pared by the Council of State Historical Records Coordinators in January 1999.

The Commission praised the report and instructed its staff to implement key parts

of its recommendations.

We then turn to state regrants with an article on the Georgia Historical Records

Advisory Board's local government regrant program. We follow this account of

the Peach State's endeavors with a report on a state board planning grant in the

Hawkeye State, Gordon 0. Hendrickson's article on the evolution of local

archival education in Iowa. Then its on to the Sunshine State, with L. Elaine Olah

sharing her experience in educating New Mexico's local governments on archival

and records management issues.

For a cool finish, we head north to Alaska for an account of how an NHPRC

grant is helping to preserve pre-statehood motion picture footage shot by Fred and

Sara Machetanz, now in the Alaska Film Archives at the University of Alaska

Fairbanks.

ISSN 0160-8460

Annotation Vo 27 3 September 1999

p S

The second of the Commission's three equal strategic goalsstates, "The NHPRC will promote broad public participationin historical documentation by collaborating with StateHistorical Records Advisory Boards to plan and carry outjointlyfunded programns to strengthen the nation's archival infra-structulre and expand the range of records that are protected andaccessible."

Because of the scope of work implicit in this statement and theprinciples of federalism inherent in our system of government, theCommission has chosen to work through a state board mechanism.This program clearly articulates such basic NHPRC tenets as theencouragement of collaboration on many levels, the reliance uponjointly funded programs, the importance of planning, and thenecessity of broad participation for the success of a sustainablenational program.

Here's how the State Board Program works: The governor ofeach state desiring to participate fully in the NHPRC grant pro-gram appoints a State Historical Records Coordinator, who isusually the professional official in charge of the state archival pro-gram or agency. and who serves as the central coordinating officerfor the historical records grant program in the state.

A State Historical Records Advisory Board (often abbreviated as"SHRAB") is also appointed in each state and consists of at leastseven members, including the Coordinator, who are hopefully asbroadly representative as possible of public and of private archives,records offices, and research institutions and organizations in thestate. The coordinator and the other members of the State Boardserve without Federal compensation or employment status.

The State Board serves in a number of capacities:

as the central advisory body for historical records planning andfor Commission-funded projects developed and carried out with-in the state,

as a coordinating body to facilitate cooperation among histori-cal records repositories and other information agencies within thestate,

and as a state-level review body for NHPRC records grant pro-posals that originate in their state.

Central to the mission of State Boards are developing and sub-mitting to the Commission state priorities for historical records aspart of a state board plan, and developing jointly funded programs toaddress key priorities. Boards accomplish this by promoting anunderstanding of the role and value of historical records, fosteringand supporting cooperative networks and programs dealing withhistorical records, and soliciting or developing proposals for NHPRCgrant projects, as well as performing a variety of other activities.

There are four specific types of grant projects that State Boardsmay propose to the Commission:

1. projects that would create a statewide plan for historical docu-mentary work,2. projects that would create a statewide program or project toimplement the plan,3. projects that request funds for basic board administration (anew development this year to encourage more boards to activelyparticipate and to help sustain this activity), and4. projects that request funds to be regranted within the state toimplement the plan.

The last of these. "regrant" projects, involve NHPRC fundsthat, along with matching non-federal dollars, may be subgrantedor subcontracted by the State Board to communities or organiza-tions within the state to address key priorities in the state plan.Participants in these programs may include any state and local insti-tutions and agencies that serve as record repositories, as well asnonprofit and volunteer organizations that hold important historicalrecords. These grants help not only to preserve and make accessi-ble individual collections of historical material, but also to supportthe establishment and development of local and statewide archivalprograms, to leverage non-federal matching dollars, and to providearchival training to volunteers and allied professionals to make surethat their work reflects good, accepted practice.

Ann Clifford Neuwhall, NHPRC executive director, presents

Tracy Duvall, associate editor, Documentary Relations of the

Southbwest, with a certificate upon his completion of the 28th

Annual Institute for the Editing of Historical Documents,

held at the State Historical Societj, of Wicsonsin, June 21-

26, 1999. Also pictured is Institute Director tlichael E.

Stevens, Wisconsin State Historian and head of the Society's

Public Histor, Division. In addition to MIr Duvall, 1 indi-

viduals participated in the Institute, popularly knowu as

"Camrp Edit." The Institute is sponsored by the Conmmission,

the Society and the university of Wisconsin-Madison. (Photo

courtesy of Steven B. Burg)

Annora on Vo 27 3 Seprember 1999

I

3

I . .. I p * I*i

The Commission's meetings follow the fiscal year of October 1to September 30. Consequently, the first meeting of the fiscalyear is in November and the second is in May.

June 1 (for the November meeting)

Proposals addressing the following top priorities:-The NHPRC will provide the American public with wide-

spread access to the papers of the founders of our demo-cratic republic and its institutions by ensuring the timelycompletion of eight projects now in progress to publishthe papers of George Washington, John Adams, BenjaminFranklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and papersthat document the Ratification of the Constitution, the FirstFederal Congress, and the early Supreme Court.

*The NHPRC will promote broad public participation in his-torical documentation by collaborating with State HistoricalRecords Advisory Boards to plan and carry out jointly fundedprograms to strengthen the nation's archival infrastructureand expand the range of records that are protected andaccessible.

*The NHPRC wsill enable the nation's archivists, records man-agers, and documentary editors to overcome the obstaclesand take advantage of the opportunities posed by electronictechnologies by continuing to provide leadership in fundingresearch and development on appraising, preserving. dis-seminating, and prosviding access to important documentarysources in electronic form.

OCTOBER 1 (for the May meeting)

Proposals not addressing the above priorities, but focusingon an activity authorized in the NHPRC statute as follows:*-collecting, describing, preserving, compiling, and publishing

(including microfilhning and other forms of reproduction) ofdocumentary sources significant to the history of the UnitedStates.

*conducting institutes, training and educational courses, andfellowships related to the activities of the Commission.

* disseminating information about documentary sourcesthrough guides, directories, and other technical publications.

* or, more specifically, documentary editing and publishing;archival preservation and processing of records for access;developing or updating descriptive systems; creation anddevelopment of archival and records management programs;development of standards, tools, and techniques to advancethe work of archivists, records managers, and documentaryeditors: and promotion of the use of records by teachers,students, and the public.

Application guidelines and forms may be requested from

NHPRC, National Archives and Records Administration, 700Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Room 111, Washington, DC 20408-

0001, (202) 501-5610 (voice), (202) 501-5601 (fax),

nhprc@archl.nara.gov (e-mail), or by accessing our Web site

at www.nara gov/nara/nhprc/.

In the 25 years that the NHPRC has had a records program (andthe letter "R" for "Records" in its name), the United States hasmade much progress toward developing a national archival infra-structure. Key components of this infrastructure are the nationalprofessional associations-SAA, AASLH, NAGARA-and theregional and state archival groups. To this, the NHPRC has addedits efforts with its State Board programs. State Historical RecordsCoordinators have been appointed in 48 states and 1 territory, andtheir Council (COSHRC) has become a force for archival progressin its own right. Today, 40 states have active State Boards.

Of these,

-36 have developed statewide plans for historical documentarywork,' roughly half have created statewide programs or projects toimplement these plans, and

20 have conducted regrant programs.

These numbers cannot begin to convey the archival energy andprofessionalism that has been facilitated across the land, nor theastonishing range of American historical documentation (in paperand electronic form) that has been and is being identified, pre-served, and made available to the public. Clearly, there is much yetto do, but this issue of Annotation is intended to celebrate some ofthe programs that have resulted from our State Board Program. +

A STAFF M E M B E R D E PARTS

Laurie A. Baty, who has served as Program Officer on the

Commission staff since 1987, is now Chief of the Branch of

Museum Services at the Department of the Interior's National

Business Center. In her new position, she is responsible for man-

aging the operations of the Interior Department's museum pro-

gram, providing training and technical assistance to the

Department's bureaus, and overseeing the management and use

of museum property in the Department's main building, including

the Department of the Interior Museum. Commission members

and staff join in wishing her well in her new endeavors.

Laurie has been responsible for the administration of grants

relating to a diverse range of projects, especially those in visual

materials, photographic collections, and museum archives. She

has administered NHPRC's fellowship program with much skill

and energy, and has also been active in outreach to the

Commission's constituent groups, regularly presenting work-

shops on grants administration and visual materials to audiences

nationwide. Her skills in desktop publishing and Web site design

have been especially valuable to the NHPRC. The Commission

will certainly miss her versatility and experience.

Annoraticn Vol 27 3 Seprember 1999

I

Ia

I

I9

Federal District judge rules to end discrimination in

Boston public schools. Student busing begins in Septemnber

Chinatouwn's P&L Sportsuwear once the city's largest

garmentfactorI, closes its doors.

Heat and beer blamied for a clash with

Boston police at Fiesta.

A local teenager attemnpts suicide. Fellowu stuzdents

All of these events were reported inBoston newspapers more than a decadeago. The articles tell each story from thejournalist's point of view, and records creat-ed by the mainstream institutions involvedin the events-the court, police. hospital.and business-provide additional informa-tion. Often these sources are the only re-corded documentation available to histori-cal researchers; the story from the view-point of the communities and individualsaffected is left untold.

Records of community organizations canprovide balance to the information andviewpoint presented in more traditionalrecords. They serve as a witness for eventsthat may have been misrepresented or underrepresented in other sources; they documentindividual accomplishments and the rea-sons for and the process of organizing forchange; they instill pride in the community;and they help the community to measure itssuccesses and setbacks and to plan for itsfuture. Preserving the history of Boston'sAfrican-American. Chinese. Latino. andgay and lesbian communities is the goal ofa 2-year NHPRC grant to NortheasternUniversity Libraries, Archives and SpecialCollections Department, Preserving the

History of Boston's Under-DocumentedCommlunities.

For each of the events mentioned above,there is more information, representingother viewpoints, that can be found in therecords of community organizations formedto address issues of concern to their con-stituencies.

Federal District judge rules to end discrim-ination in Boston public schlools. Studentbusing begints in September.

Almost 20 years after Brown v. Board ofEducation, the U.S. Supreme Court deci-sion making segregation in public schoolsillegal, a group of parents joined theNAACP in a lawsuit to force the BostonPublic School Committee to integrate thecity's schools. Two years later, court-ordered busing was implemented, and chil-dren were transported between neighbor-hoods to the most racially segregatedschools. Failed attempts by African-American parents to join with white parentsto facilitate a peaceful implementation ofbusing served as a warning that the reactionto busing would likely be hostile and per-haps even dangerous. So, the African-American parents formed an information

center and hotline that provided a means ofcommunication among parents. their chil-dren. and city officials. This story is chron-icled in the records of Operation Exodusand the Metropolitan Council for Educa-tional Opportunity (METCO), which havebeen slated for preservation as a result ofthe Northeastern project.

Chinatown's P&L Sportswear, once thecitv's largest garmenit factory, closes itsdoors.

The closing of P&L Sportswear was aloss to the city, but it was an even greaterloss to Boston's Chinatown, where it wassituated, and to the 350 workers who wereleft jobless. The workers, predominantlynon-English-speaking Chinese women,were unable to find other employment. Bylaw, the city was required to provide thesegarment workers with unemployment bene-fits, including training, but it failed to do so.A few months after the plant closing, how-ever. the city of Boston did provide bothunemployment benefits and training to 150white men who were laid off from a meat-packing plant. The Chinese ProgressiveAssociation helped the former P&Lemployees prepare a list of demands and

Ar norcon Vo 273 Sepreniber Q99

organize demonstrations that quickly led tostate funding for retraining and extendedhealth insurance benefits for the workers.The records of the Chinese ProgressiveAssociation have been designated a priorityfor preservation.

Heat and beer blamed for a clash withBoston police at Fiesta.

Three days of riots, incited by charges ofexcessive force and racism on the part ofthe Boston police, became the flashpointfor Latino community organizing inBoston. As a result of this disturbance andthe subsequent organizing, city officialsbegan to listen to community organizerswho were working on issues such as thehigh unemployment rate, lack of affordablehousing, cuts in welfare, elevated highschool dropout rates, and the need for bilin-gual education. When court-ordered busingwas imposed, Latino parents were convincedthat it would negatively affect the commu-nity by removing students from newlyestablished bilingual programs. They formedEl Comit6 de Padres and successfullystopped the busing of Latino children. Therecords of the defunct Comite de Padreswere located at Inquilinos Boricuas en Acci6n(Puerto Rican Tenants in Action); negotia-tions are underway for the records of bothgroups to be donated to NortheasternUniversity's Archives.

A local teenager attempts suicide. Fellowstudents wonder why.

The young man who attempted suicidewas gay. He had been taunted routinely bya group of his classmates. Repeatedrequests for support from his teachers weredenied; they told him that the harassmentwould stop if he just started acting morelike the rest of the boys. After the suicideattempt, the young man found solace in theBoston Alliance for Gay and Lesbian Youth(BAGLY), a support group for lesbian andgay teenagers. Through BAGLY, he provid-ed testimony that led to passage of the firstlegislation in the country to protect gay andlesbian students in public schools from dis-crimination. Identified as a priority for pre-servation under the grant, the records ofBAGLY are in the process of being trans-ferred to the Northeastern UniversityArchives.

Northeastern University's project to pre-serve the history of Boston's under-docu-mented communities officially began inSeptember 1998. Its primary goal is to plan

for the systematic preservation of recordsdocumenting the African-American, Chi-nese, Latino, and gay and lesbian commu-nities in Boston. Project staff members areworking with four advisory boards com-prising community leaders, activists, andhistorians to analyze each community interms of its organizations and salient issues,identify organizations and key leaderswhose records are priorities for preserva-tion, and negotiate the gift of records to

Elma Leuwis and Duke Ellington at a Playhousein the Park event, from the National Center forAfro-American Artists Collection, NortheasternUniversity

Northeastern or other local repositories. Arelated goal of the project is to process col-lections of records, transferred to North-eastern's Archives prior to the start of thegrant, from three organizations that relate tocommunities involved in the project:National Center for Afro-American Artists,including the records of the Elma LewisSchool of Fine Arts; La Alianza Hispana;and AIDS Action Committee ofMassachusetts. The processing of therecords of the National Center for Afro-American Artists has been completed andthe finding aid is available on the Archives'Web site at www.lib.neu.edu/archives/.

Boston is famous for its institutions ofhigher education and its public and privatearchival repositories. Only a few of these,however, actively collect records of localcommunity groups. Some records of Bostoncommunity organizations have been pre-served elsewhere. The Library of Congress,for example, collects records of the branch-es of national organizations, such as theNational Association for the Advancementof Colored People, and a few collections oforganizational records and personal papersof community leaders are held by institu-tions outside of Boston. The materials thathave been preserved represent a fraction

�jt�1,9-

Annotaton Vol 27 3 Seprember 1999

of the materials necessary to documentBoston's under-represented communities,however, and distant repositories, thoughopen to scholars, may be largely inaccessi-ble to community members.

In their struggle for full inclusion in soci-ety, the four minority populations that arethe focus of the Northeastern project-African-American, Chinese, Latino, andgay and lesbian-created support networksand services unique to each of their needs.These four communities were selectedbecause they are large minority popula-tions, because each community's history isan important piece of Boston's history, andbecause all of the communities werealready committed to preserving their histo-ry. They had identified the lack of availabledocumentation related to their communitiesas a problem and had begun action to securetheir historical record. The Chinese and thelesbian and gay communities have well-established community history groups-theChinese Historical Society and The HistoryProject-that had recognized that theylack suitable storage space for historicalmaterials. There was also a need voiced bycommunity historians and academics, whohad begun significant research projects onBoston's African-American and Latinocommunities, for local archivists to locateand secure collections for research purposes.

Because the task of preserving materialsto document all aspects of each of the fourunder-documented communities is largerthan one repository could hope to handle,the project was designed as a collaborativeeffort. Representatives from more than 20local repositories are involved, and alreadyseveral informal agreements to assumeresponsibility for collecting in particularareas have been achieved. The Massa-chusetts Historical Society will focus onthe environment; Harvard University'sFrancis A. Countway Library of Medicinehas agreed to begin collecting organization-al records relating to community and publichealth in each of the four under-document-ed communities; the Massachusetts Collegeof Art is interested in collecting in the areaof fine arts; Northeastern will collect socialwelfare and social reform materials; and theSchlesinger Library, the Bostonian Society,and the University of Massachusetts,Boston, are also actively collecting materi-al in collaboration with this project. TheBoston Public Library (BPL) is strengthen-ing its collection of minority communitynewspapers with help from the project in

6

locating issues to complete broken runs andidentifying new titles to collect. North-eastern will broker the transfer of collec-tions to other repositories when appropri-ate.

In addition to collaboration with localrepositories, the project is also built on col-laboration with each community. Four advi-sory boards have provided essential infor-mation and guidance to the project. Eachboard consists of a community liaison andapproximately 8-12 activists, academics,and community historians. Members of theboards were selected because they hadshown a commitment to preserving theircommunity's history. At the same time, itwas important to reflect the diversity wvithineach community on the boards. Each boardmet just twice during the year so as not totax the goodwill of the board members.Advisors were asked to provide the namesof organizations and individuals in theircommunities that should be considered forpossible documentation. Once these listswere as complete as possible, advisorsselected the most significant organizationsas priorities for documentation and provid-ed information about whom to contact with-in each organization. Both active anddefunct organizations are being considered,although it is obviously more difficult tolocate records of organizations that are nolonger in existence. The project wasdesigned to be flexible so that it could meetthe needs of the communities while fulfill-ing our responsibilities as grant recipient.The consensus among board members isthat the project has been a productive,enjoyable, and conflict-free way to reflecton the community's history while workingtogether creatively to help develop a planfor preserving it.

The basic concept behind the documenta-tion aspect of the project is to identify theuniverse of possible documentation by cat-egorizing the organizations and individualsidentified by the advisors. The advisorsthen select priorities for documentationfrom among the active organizations, whichare matched to an appropriate collaboratinginstitution. The analysis involves categoriz-ing the organizations and individuals basedon the topical breakdown of human endeav-or outlined by Richard Cox in DocumentingLocalities: A Practical Model for AmericanArchivists and Manuscript Curators(Lanham, MD: The Society of AmericanArchivists and The Scarecrow Press, 1996).This model was modified to apply to popu-

lations rather than locales, and the defini-tions were adjusted to reflect the reality ofeach community's uniqueness and it rela-tionship to the larger society. The effective-ness of the project will be measured in partby the ability to move beyond this analysisand planning to the successful transfer of anumber of priority collections to appropri-ate repositories.

The first year's goals. all of which havebeen met, were to finish processing the

C, %i

AnnualAIDS benefit walkposter from theAIDSAction Committee of Massachusetts Collection,Northeastern Univ,ersitly

National Center for Afro-American Artistsrecords; complete an analysis of each of thefour communities, which had begun prior tothe start of the grant, and create a databaseof this information that will be available forresearch and collection management uses;and identify priorities for preservation. Thesecond year's goals are to process therecords of La Alianza Hispana and AIDSAction Committee of Massachusetts, todevelop the database further, to expand out-reach efforts to the four communities, andto work with advisory board liaisons tonegotiate gift agreements and facilitatetransfer of records to appropriate reposito-ries. Organizations whose records aredonated to Northeastern will undergo fur-ther analysis, and staff will create a docu-mentation plan to assist both organizationstaff and project staff in identifying appro-priate historical materials. Project staff havedeveloped four brochures for use in the out-reach effort that will be distributed to theheads of active organizations and targetedindividuals in an effort to uncover therecords of defunct organization.

At this writing, just under a year into theproject, there are several findings that bear

emphasizing. First, is the necessity of lay-ing the groundwork with each communityand organization to sustain a long-termrelationship. We have also come to fullyappreciate the value of collaboration-theproject couldn't be accomplished withoutguidance from the advisory boards, theirliaisons, and assistance from the collaborat-ing repositories. And the significance offlexibility should not be underestimated-the approach to each community and eachorganization needs to be carefully consid-ered and planned. It is also important tomention that it is impossible to predict howan organization will react when solicited todonate its records, even with the help ofliaisons who are well-respected communitymembers, or how long it will take to securea fully executed gift agreement. Agree-ments that we thought were a sure thinghave not yet materialized, while one partic-ular agreement that we thought was a longshot seems to be developing rapidly.Finally, the diversity within the four com-munities means there is no single experi-ence within or between communities; thereis, however, the common desire to worktogether to preserve their history.

One of several community documenta-tion projects nationally, the Northeasternproject moves beyond the traditional,unsystematic approach to the collection andpreservation of records in Boston. The proj-ect applies the methods developed to docu-ment locales and specific types of institu-tion to communities and community-basedorganizations. Our hope is that this projectwill mark the beginning of a continuingeffort to document Boston's minority com-munities, will enhance the work of theMassachusetts Historical Records AdvisoryBoard to document the Commonwealth,and will add yet another approach to docu-mentation efforts nationwide. +

NANCr RICHARD IS THE PROJECT ARCHI\' IST FOR

PRI SERVIN. THE HISTORY OF BOSTON 'S t TNDER

DuCLMENTED COMMUNITIES. JOAN D. KRLZACK, THE

PROJECI DIRECTIOR. IS U.NIVERSITY ARCHIVIST AND)

HEAD, SPFCI A. COLI.ECTIONS DEPARTMENT. AT NORTII-

EASTERN UNIVERSIM 'S SNELL LIBRAR-. TTIANK\ ALS()

1O DESIGNER John' KANE, AHO DID YEONIAN AORK IN

PROX IDING THE ILLUSTRATIONS FOR THIS ARTICLE.

Annororon Vol 27 3 Seprtember 1999 7

I mo,

[Editors Note: The fiollouinig alticle is e.vc'eptedfroim The AHPRC Planning Initiative: 4nEvtahiation," a report prepared bi' the Coiiiicil rfState Historic(al Records Coordlinators in Janiuari1999 and presented to the AHIPR(; at its Febroar'1999 mneeting. andfroa the smmarn o' ' t oef/llow-} tp discAtssioni held at AHPRC reqiuest a(it theJanuart' 19)99 COSHRC mneeting. 7he fidl report isatailable onz the ?VHPRC Web site. xwxx.nr.i.govx nara nhprc. Th77e Commissi(on praised the reportand instructed its staif to imnplemnent ker parts of therecoimnnezidations, bit reemains committed to thegoal of 100% participation bi the states in its piiin-ning initiatie.}

grants for creating and updating state strate-gic plans for meeting records needs, basedon the previous state assessments, and en-compassing both documentary preservationand publication."

The intent was, in the words of Richard A.Cameron, NHPRC's Director for StatePrograms, "to encourage state boards tomove beyond the 'archives happen' approachto a more active shaping of the archival land-scape." The initiative hoped to address con-

priorities identified was much more manage-able, in one analysis an average of 6.9-amuch more realistic number than thosefound in the 1980s plans. The lowest numberwas 4; the highest was 10.

Coordinators were also asked about pit-falls in the planning process. They cited rela-tionships with outside groups-failing toinclude them in the process, difficulty in sus-taining their interest beyond the availabilityof grants, and the tendency of the board to

want to move faster thanits constituents. One notedthat combining planningwith regular meetings ofthe board stretched theprocess out too long. Otherproblems were failure tofocus on the doable and the

In the 1980s, the National HistoricalPublications and Records Commissionbegan funding statewide assessment studiesof archival needs and conditions. The hopewas that corrective action would follow thearticulation of problems and solutions. Insome cases, it did. But in many others, therecommendations were so wide ranging andbroadly defined that focused action was dif-ficult.

New Hampshire is but one of the statesthat detailed the problem. Its 1984 assess-ment identified 24 recommendations forstate government records, 23 for local gov-ernment records, 10 for historical recordsrepositories, and 12 for statewide supportingservices and programs. A decade later, only11 of the 69 recommended objectives hadbeen achieved.

The reason is that since the late 1980s,state budget reductions have compelled allNew Hampshire state agencies, includingthe state archives, to protect their core mis-sions, resulting in decreased attention to theState Historical Records Advisory Board(SHRAB) and its recommendations fromstate archives staff. This, combined withNew Hampshire's strong tradition of localgovernment autonomy, has meant that theboard lacked both the resources and influ-ence to implement state services or toknowledgeably advise other repositories.

Nonetheless, planning has remained aconcern of both the states and the NHPRC,and the NHPRC's 1992 long-range planestablished it as one of its top priorities "tostrengthen the efforts of state historicalrecords coordinators and boards by offering

cerns that the 1980s efforts had not reachedbeyond the immediate archival and historicalcommunities, nor involved cooperative,regional, or national approaches, and thatplanning had not become a standard operat-ing procedure for the state boards.

Since the implementation of the new plan-ning grants in 1993, 36 states have complet-ed and adopted plans, while 5 states and theCommonwealth of Puerto Rico (includingthose grants made in November 1998) areworking on plans. Clearly there is strongsupport for state board planning, as well as abelief that such planning efforts strengthen aboard. In one coordinator's words, "Theplanning process is important because itbuilds coalitions, develops consensus, estab-lishes a framework for activities and legiti-macy for priorities. We consider the processso important, we included it in our newregrant and will require applicants to gothrough an initial process involving planningto identify needs and priorities."

At their January 1998 meeting, theCouncil of State Historical RecordsCoordinators (COSHRC) set out to evaluatethe 1990s NHPRC planning initiative. Twoplanning practices stood out as having themost value to those that used them-hiring aconsultant and planning in a retreat setting.Focus groups, task forces, and analysis of the1980s planning effort seemed less useful,even though board assessment of previousplans was the most used practice.

The change from the 1980s emphasis onidentifying problems to the 1990s focus onthe potential for action was apparent hereand in the plans. The average number of

difficulty of leveragingoutside funds for regrant match. One coordi-nator noted difficulty in getting the board toview the process as a means to an end, ratherthan a requirement of doing business withthe NHPRC.

One hoped-for result of the NHPRC 1990splanning initiative was more inclusion ofoutside groups. Clearly, this result has beenachieved. Eleven states reported involving atotal of nearly 1,000 people. In one case, aState Records Commission was created as aresult of the consolidation of state archivesand records management functions. In othercases, new goals-based alliances have beenformed involving libraries, a records associ-ation, and other state departments. Boardcomposition changes have included the addi-tion of more women in one state and theinvolvement of the humanities council inanother.

Some coordinators have had more time toobserve changes in board composition andalliances. They reported additions to theirboards of minorities and local governmentrepresentatives, broader geographic repre-sentation, and representatives of new groups,including land surveyors. In one state, twooutside organizations used the NHPRC-funded plan to guide their activities.

The variety of collaborative venturesresulting from state plans has included theFlorida SHRAB's partnership with theFlorida Records Management Association:Minnesota's collaborations with more than20 rural and Hispanic community organiza-tions; a proposed project involving the NorthDakota and Minnesota boards: Ohio boardwork with the State Library of Ohio, the

Annotaron Vo 273 Seprember 19998

Ohio Public Library Information Network.the Western Reserve Historical Society, thestate Department of Administrative Services,and other state agencies; the North CarolinaSHRAB's partnerships with the Society ofNorth Carolina Archivists and the NorthCarolina African American Archive Group;an agreement in Michigan between a univer-sity archives and the state archives to workwith the governor's office on public and pri-vate gubernatorial records; sponsoring theformation of a state archives association inSouth Carolina: and in Vermont, work withland surveyors on land records and withmuseums and galleries on collections care.

A second goal of the NHPRC 1990s plan-ning initiative was to create plans that wereused. There has been strong confirmationthat in most cases the plans are used and notput on the shelf to collect dust.

The focus on achievable goals and actionshas also resulted in a variety of concrete pro-grams to improve the preservation of andaccess to records. Some of the greatest suc-cesses have come with regrant programs, butsome states list this as an unachievableobjective because of the inability to raisematching funds. North Carolina and SouthCarolina both leveraged state funds to sup-plement regrant programs. While Michiganwas unable to do this, its board memberswere enthusiastic enough about the objectiveof helping small community-based organiza-tions improve their archival practices to vol-unteer to provide unpaid consultant servicesto 40 of them as match for Michigan'sregrant program. Plans have also been linkedto support for new archival buildings inSouth Carolina. New Hampshire, andDelaware. Ohio used its plan to leverage astate commitment to automation, electronicrecords, and World Wide Web information.

The information reported above indicatesthat the 1990s NHPRC planning initiativehas been successful in encouraging collabo-rative. action-oriented planning efforts. Thisis a marked change from the 1980s effort.However, in the area of measurable evalua-tion, there is clearly room for continuedimprovement. Whatever measures are to beused, the NHPRC and the Council of StateHistorical Records Coordinators need toagree on a few achievable measures andmake a commitment to use them.

Why have some states and territories notparticipated in the planning initiative? Twothings are clear. First, planning cannot be ef-fective if the organization doing the planning

does not have the status, power, or will to setcollective priorities and take collectiveaction. The diverse SHRAB conditions cre-ated by gubernatorial appointments and thevarying strengths of state archival programsmake it impossible to achieve 100% parti-cipation or consistency across the nation.Second, the impetus for and burden ofstatewide board planning lie with statearchival programs. Such planning is aresource commitment that competes witheverything from internal planning to acces-sioning, processing, and referencing records.

The NHPRC 1990s planning initiative ischanging the way SHRABs work. Perhapsmore than consciously intended, it is pushingthem and the state archives that lead themtowards taking responsibility for statewidecoordination of archival planning. The paral-lel support of COSHRC offers the potentialof creating an archival planning and supportsystem that extends from the national levelto the smallest community. This is particular-ly important in a era when all seem to realizethat large archival repositories will never beable to collect, preserve, and provide accessto all of the important records created in thenation. Many of those records-some docu-menting corporations and individuals ofnational significance-will remain in thehands of volunteers, librarians, and othersnot trained as archivists.

Most state archives have long had afocused, legislatively mandated mission-topreserve and make accessible the records ofstate and possibly local government. Somewith a long association with a state historicalsociety or library also have strong manu-script collections. Few have seen their coremission as being the leader of statewide his-torical records planning and advocacy or asimproving the condition of records held incommunity repositories throughout theirstates.

The NHPRC posits a role for the SHRABsof serving as a link between national archivalefforts and local communities. It does this inthe traditional federal-state relationship ofstate developmental assistance and review ofgrants (or National Register nominations)before they reach a federal agency. But withits planning initiatives, it also asks theboards-and therefore the state archivistswho in most cases serve as their coordina-tors-to take on statewide planning, advoca-cy, and educational roles that might be per-formed in other history disciplines-or thearchival discipline-by professional associa-

tions or advocacy organizations. In the fieldof historic preservation, this role is filled bystate agencies-the State Historical Preser-vation Offices-but it is subsidized at amuch higher level than that offered throughNHPRC grants.

Where this NHPRC-encouraged stepping-out-of-the-state-archives box is successful, itcan result in much broader public support ofthe state archives program and an enhancedrole for archives across the state. But be-cause that role is not an altogether comfort-able one for state archives, it will continue tobe greeted with different levels of enthusi-asm and financial support from state to state.

In the follow-up discussion at theirJanuary 1999 meeting, COSHRC membersemphasized that many state planning effortsare just beginning to produce results.Everything in the current evaluation must beconsidered preliminary at best. However,most can see immediate benefits from theprocess and its inclusion of new and oldplayers in thinking about the preservationand access of archival records in their states.They also noted that the most difficult part ofplanning for the SHRABs remains keepingthe focus on things the boards can do anddefining clear products that will result fromsuccessful implementation of a plan. A sec-ond concern is that the plans cast a wideenough net to allow the states to respond tounforeseen opportunities and seek NHPRCsupport for their efforts in such cases.

COSHRC members also cautioned thatcare must be taken in assuming cause andeffect when attributing results to planningefforts. Plans are often only one element inthe successful pursuit of improvement in thecondition of archival records in a state. Theynoted that with more time, they could puttogether more statistical information on out-puts. Such outcomes as the number or per-centage of institutions achieving certainarchival standards over a period of time maybe more revealing than the simple countingof feet of records processed. Membersstrongly supported performance measures,set by the NHPRC, that are consistent acrosssimilar grants and agreed upon at the begin-ning of a grant. They suggested includingdemonstration projects with evaluationmeasures in the planning process. Finally,COSHRC members encouraged the NHPRCstaff to increase efforts to ensure wide dis-semination of grant products. -

Annoration Vo 27 3 Seprember 1999 9

GEORGIA ON OUR MINDSAt its February 1996 meeting, theNHPRC recommended that the GeorgiaHistorical Records Advisory Board(GHRAB) be awarded a 2-year grant of$298,386 to establish a local governmentregrant program. For its part, the State ofGeorgia put up $275,000 in matching fundsand $185,388 in in-kind contributions tosecure the NHPRC grant. Other sources offunds and expertise included variousGeorgia state institutions; the NationalCenter for Preservation Technology andTraining; the Georgia Chapter, GovernmentManagement Information Sciences; theGeorgia Records Association; and individ-ual county and municipal governments andregional development centers.

The goals of GHRAB's local governmentregrant program were to provide direct as-sistance to enhance or establish localrecords management programs, to trainlocal government staff members in archivaland records management fundamentals, andto demonstrate that multi-governmentcooperatives are an effective solution torecords needs.

To maximize the value of individual proj-ects within the overall program, as well asto create a strong foundation for future ef-forts across the state, GHRAB placed spe-cial emphasis on leveraging federal, state,and local funding and expertise; fosteringcooperative projects for enhanced scopeand greater efficiency; applying new tech-nologies; and developing models for futureinitiatives.

GHRAB awarded grants to 35 Georgiacounties, cities, consolidated governments,school systems, regional development cen-ters, and professional records managementassociations. Under the regrant program,GHRAB-sponsored training workshops andsite visits served more than 150 local

government units and organizations acrossGeorgia.

Local government officials started much-needed records management programs andenhanced existing programs. They invento-ried old county records and loose court-house documents, established secure envi-ronments for storage and better access,improved archival and records managementpractices and expanded staffing, imple-mented new computer systems, micro-filmed historical and vital records, devel-oped disaster plans, and saved many histor-ical records for posterity.

From the original cash and in-kind con-tributions committed in the approved grantbudget, the project was eventually able toleverage additional funds totaling $985,863in cash and $458,909 in in-kind effortsallocated by local governments. Other sig-nificant accomplishments included 8 newcity or county records programs establishedand 24 existing programs enhanced, 6 newfull-time records management positionscreated, 9,015 boxes of records inventoried,157 records series identified and invento-ried, and 21 common retention sche-dules implemented. In addition, GHRABhelped local governments adapt to usingthe Internet for posting and distributinginformation about records to the stategovernment, and established a listserv forstate public records managers to use indiscussing common problems and solu-tions.

GHRAB's local government regrant pro-gram proved that in an environment of highexpectations and limited resources, careful-ly designed cooperative initiatives can pro-duce efficient, cost-effective results. Oneregional records service center was estab-lished, and two regional development cen-ters sponsored training and records needs

assessment projects for each of their mem-ber local governments. GHRAB and theGeorgia Department of Archives andHistory (GDAH) developed training mate-rials and conducted six regional recordsmanagement and preservation workshopsfor over 300 people, and sponsored a localgovernment recognition day (GHRABDay) at the State Capitol.

GDAH staff members administered thelocal government regrant program andmade numerous site visits to the projects toreview progress and consult with local offi-cials. Participating local governments com-mitted almost $500,000 in cash and in-kindservices to improve their records manage-ment efforts. The Georgia General Assem-bly provided additional appropriations forlocal grants, and Georgia's Department ofCommunity Affairs also contributed fundsfor these grants.

The local government regrant programcreated useful records management toolsfor municipal and county governments.New inventory forms, records managementmanuals, computer software, and disasterplans were developed and introduced. GDAHmade these materials and other technicalinformation available over the Internet.

While the program did not specificallyset out to raise awareness of the importanceof historical records at the local level, theindividual projects helped bring this aboutin varying degrees. In many cases, the rip-ple effect extended all the way from thosedesigning and implementing projects tolocal governing bodies and members of thegeneral public, all of whom developed anappreciation for the need to preserve theseresources and make them accessible withintheir communities.

The total value of GHRAB's local govern-ment regrant program was approximately

Annotraton Vo 273 Seprember 199910

OPPOSITE PAGE LEFT: The old jail in Applinig wasused by Columbia County as a temporary rec-ords storage facilityRIGHT: Columbia County's neu, uwarehouse,shown here under construction adjacent to thecounty administrative center contains perma-nent records storage facilities.

$1.4 million. The program's success shouldnot overshadow the fact that its scope wasrelatively small for a state as large anddiverse as Georgia. Many more potentialparticipants could be served in the futurethrough sustained cooperative efforts likethis one. Moreover, many participantsreported that they had found additionalneeds for records preservation and accessand expressed the hope of joining anyfuture programs. Local government offi-cials noted a critical need for continuingassistance through direct grants, education.training, and information networks. In sum-mary, this program could be the seed fromwhich larger efforts will grow.

COLUMBIA COUNTY

Columbia County, on the South Carolinaborder, was one of the participants in thelocal government regrant program. Itsefforts will serve as an example of what onelocal government could accomplish with agrant from this program. In June 1996, thecounty applied for a grant to establish arecords retention system and to set up adatabase to maintain an updated recordsinventory and records retention schedule.GDAH approved the grant in August 1996,with the County Clerk, Phebe J. Dent, serv-ing as grant administrator.

Ms. Dent's first efforts were devoted tothe identification of inactive records in thevarious departments of county government.She formed a records retention committeecomposed of representatives of key depart-

ments and institutions. Ms. Dent also wrote

the county's records retention policy andprocedure users handbook in September1996 and secured its approval by the Boardof County Commissioners (BOCC). Earlyin 1997, planning began for microfilming ofBOCC records in the following fiscal year.

The necessary computer hardware andsoftware for the database were purchasedand set up in the fall of 1996, with a half-time student intern hired as records reten-tion assistant. The Clerk and the assistantreboxed 145 cubic feet of BOCC records,which were moved to environmentally con-trolled space in the county administrativecomplex for which shelving had been

purchased and installed. However, theSheriff'soffice exercised its prerogative to claim thespace for one of its departments. As a stop-gap measure, the records storage site wasmoved to the cafeteria of a vacant elemen-tary school some 23 miles from the countyadministrative complex after heating and airconditioning equipment had been installedthere. Both storage sites were temporary,since the records had been allocated environ-mentally controlled space in a county ware-house being built adjacent to the adminis-trative complex. Other records had previ-ously been moved from the attic of ApplingCourthouse to temporary storage space inthe old jail building in Appling, the countyseat, in preparation for transfer to the newwarehouse.

OTHER EFFORTS

Other localities that produced recordsinventories under such grants were thecities of Albany and Senoia: the Columbusconsolidated government: and Cherokee.Jackson, and Upson Counties. The cities ofEastman, Grantville, McRae, Statesboro,and Tybee Island; the Gainesville cityschools: and Baldwin. Bleckley. Carroll.Heard, and Houston Counties receivedgrants to establish records managementprograms. The city of Dahlonega and Bibband Laurens Counties microfilmed recordswith their grant money. Taylor County andthe city of Carrollton included disaster pre-paredness and recovery planning among thetasks addressed by their grants.

Clayton County, the city of Marietta, andthe Georgia Records Association used theirgrants for records management software.The city of Gainesville used its grant todevelop a records storage program, whileJones County prepared a historical recordspreservation management program with itsgrant. Morgan County and the city ofSavannah had grants for records accessprojects. Liberty and Tatnall Counties andthe Columbus consolidated governmentundertook cooperative projects within theircommunities. Lastly, two regional recordsmanagement projects were funded for theChattahoochee-Flint and the Heart ofGeorgia-Altamaha Regional DevelopmentCenters.

RESULTS

What follows are some of the accom-plishments reported by the 35 local govern-ments that took part in the GHRAB

program. Bleckley County created a full-time records management position wherenone had previously existed. In the courseof inventorying its records, CarrollCounty found records belonging to fourother counties, which were returned totheir rightful owners. Cherokee Countyturned up documents pertaining to the con-struction of the old county courthouse,which were used to emphasize the impor-tance of preserving the building. ClaytonCounty completed the programmingand installation of new records manage-ment software, which it made available toother Georgia local governments at little orno cost.

Jackson County found court minutebooks dating back to 1796 and longbelieved lost: significant records document-ing the transfer of slaves into the state andrelating to indentured servitude there werediscovered bound into a volume of courtrecords. Tattnall County used its funds toleverage another state grant that financedthe renovation of the old county jail as arecords storage facility: a preliminaryrecords survey there turned up records dat-ing back to 1 805. significantly bettering theprevious earliest known date of 1854. Thetwo regional development centers furtherextended the impact of the GHRAB localgovernment program to 20 counties and 81incorporated cities and towns.

These local developments by no meansexhaust the achievements recorded for theNHPRC regrant to GHRAB. Recognizingthe need to continue these important servic-es to Georgia's communities, Secretary ofState Cathy Cox has added a full-timeLocal Records Coordinator to the GDAHstaff. For further information, and to learnmore about other projects and programsundertaken by GDAH and GHRAB, go toGDAH's Web site, vwww.sos.state.ga.us/

archives.Considering all that was accom-plished under this regrant may keep Georgiaon your mind too! +

ELIZABFTIH ALOI BARR AND A\DREN S. TA;LoR OF

GDAH GENEROISLY PROVI)DED ASSISTANCE IN THE

WSRITING OF TIIS ARTICLE AND THE IDENTIFICATION OF

TnHE ILL ISTRATIONS.

Annoraron Vol 273 Seprember 1999 11

The Iowa County Historical Society inMarengo, Iowa, hired an outside consultantto provide advice and counsel on the proce-dures for upgrading its historical researchlibrary in 1993. Three years later, theWinneshiek County Historical Society inDecorah, Iowa, developed a curriculum fortraining volunteers in the care and preserva-tion of historical collections. The followingyear, the City Clerk's Association ofNorthwest Iowa convened a two-sessionworkshop on records management for localgovernments using the "Records ManagementWorkshop Curriculum for Local Govern-ment" that the International Institute ofMunicipal Clerks and the National Associa-tion of Government Archives and RecordsAdministrators developed with support fromthe NHPRC.

In September and October. 1999, theWebster County Historical Society in FortDodge, Iowa, will sponsor a series of fourtraining workshops for colleagues from areahistorical societies. The Ackley HeritageSociety in Ackley, Iowa, will soon be spon-soring workshops for area historical societieson the care of historic photographs. Theselocal education efforts are products of adecade-long emphasis of the Iowa HistoricalRecords Advisory Board (IHRAB) to im-prove the level of care for the state's docu-mentary resources through education andtraining.

In 1989 the Iowa General Assembly fundeda new grant program that had been author-ized in 1986. That program, the HistoricalResource Development Program (HRDP),established a program of grants to preserve,conserve, interpret, and enhance historicalresources in the state. The program allowsgrants for the acquisition, development,preservation, conservation, and interpreta-tion of historical resources and "professionaltraining and education programs on theacquisition, development, preservation, con-servation, and interpretation of historicalresources."

This matching grant program has encour-aged the preservation of valuable historicalresources throughout the state. More than$9.5 million has been awarded to historicalsocieties, local governments, individuals, andprivate organizations for projects in the his-toric preservation, museum, and documen-tary collections categories since 1989.

The Iowa Historical Records AdvisoryBoard was re-invigorated in 1989 in part toserve as the review panel for HRDP applica-tions related to documentary collections.Throughout its history, the HRDP grant

program has emphasized providing assis-tance to organizations with few or no paidstaff members. Iowa, like many states, isblessed with organized historical societies inall of its 99 counties as well as in many of itscities and towns.

More than 325 historical societies andmuseums are active in the state. In addition.more than 525 public libraries and numerousgenealogical societies include original his-torical documents in their collections. Mostof these organizations have few paid staffmembers and fewer staff members who havereceived even the most basic archival train-ing. The HRDP staff, and IHRAB as thegrants review panel, consciously work toreach these small repositories to provideassistance in the preservation of documentsand other historical resources of local andstatewide importance.

Intuitively, IHRAB recognized the need topreserve and enhance access to materials inthese small organizations. At the same time.the board recognized the need to providequality advice to the grant recipients. In aneffort to provide that advice, the boardencouraged applicants to employ qualifiedadvisers and consultants to provide one-on-one advice. In this way, individual applicantsreceived advice specifically designed forindividual problems. The board recognizedthe validity of this approach to training, butalso soon recognized that the same problemsseemed to arise for many of the applicants.

The board then envisioned a training effortthat could meet the needs of multiple appli-cants with a lower overall cost. In order toassure that review of project applications canbe based on an understanding of the actualproblems facing historical repositories in thestate, and in order to identify the areas ofgreatest need for training. IHRAB has sur-veyed, reviewed, and analyzed conditions inlocal repositories many times.

A common thread resulting from theseanalyses is the need for more educationalopportunities to enhance care of documen-tary collections in local repositories.IHRAB's response to the demand forenhanced educational opportunities has been

to include professional training and educa-tion as a priority item in all of its operationaland strategic plans. When IHRAB adoptedits 1992 strategic plan, with the assistance ofan NHPRC grant, the board also adopted aset of funding priorities for the HRDP grantprogram. The funding priorities statementincluded professional training and educationas a top priority for HRDP grant projects.

That funding priority arose from theboard's first goal in the 1992 plan-its edu-cation goal. The board proposed to surveyrepositories to determine the level of collec-tions care given to materials in those reposi-tories and to identify repository training needs.The board proposed to report its findings tothe Iowa archival community at the StateHistorical Society of Iowa's annual meeting.

In 1993 IHRAB implemented its first sur-vey of historical repositories since prepara-tion of its 1984 plan. The 1993 survey con-tacted 685 institutions known or assumed tohave historical records in their holdings. Aremarkable 42 percent of the institutions (285)responded to the survey. Among the mostrevealing responses were those related tostaff training and the desire for additionalworkshop training experiences. Nearly half(131) of the institutions that responded indi-cated that none of their paid or volunteerstaff had ever had archival training. Theytruly were operating on the principle thatapplication of "common sense" solutions tothe organization, preservation, and storage ofhistorical records would suffice.

At the same time that the respondentsacknowledged their lack of training, theyalso recognized the need for training. Almost75 percent of the respondents indicated adesire to send staff (paid and unpaid) toarchival seminars and workshops, providedthat those workshops were conducted within70 miles of their homes.

In response to these findings, and withencouragement from IHRAB, the Win-neshiek County Historical Society took edu-cational efforts to another level when it pro-posed to train a cadre of volunteers through aformal, designed training program. Whereprevious HRDP grants involved use of a

Annoraron Vol 27 3 Septrember 1999

The Evolution ofLocal Archival Education

THE IOWA EXPERIENCE- @I0 0 i

12

consultant to provide advice and counsel tothe grant recipient, this project involved spe-cific training to a group of volunteers.

The HRDP grant-funded project prepareda three-part curriculum for training volun-teers. Once trained, the volunteers worked toprepare the Society's collections for publicaccess. Under the guidance of the Director ofthe Luther College Archives (who also servedas President of the Winneshiek CountyHistorical Society), the project workedsmoothly with 15 individuals trained in basicarchival practices. These trained volunteersthen applied their skills to the collections of

grant funds to encourage intensive trainingto records keepers from many organizations,not just from the applicant institution.

In keeping in with this approach, the boardrecently funded two applications designed toprovide workshop training to local historicalsocieties and museums. In these cases, alocal historical society will sponsor specifictraining for its own volunteers as well asmembers of area repositories using trainedoutside instructors.

Both the Webster County HistoricalSociety in Fort Dodge, Iowa, and the AckleyHeritage Society in Ackley, Iowa, have

received previous IIKutP grants.They recognize the need for con-tinuing education for their ownvolunteer staff (neither has anypaid staff). and they recognize thatother local organizations also havean interest in and need for thetraining. When these workshopstake place in late 1999, IHRABhopes other organizations will beencouraged to conduct similar work-shops in other parts of the state.

In 1996, with continued finan-cial support from the NHPRC, theIHRAB reviewed its 1992 planand developed a new strategicplan. Utilizing the data gathered in1993, as well as input from focusgrouns drawn from records cre-

the Winneshiek County Historical Society,and two continued their training as internswith the Luther College Archives.

Another evolution in IHRAB's encourage-ment of training efforts at the local level wasan effort to provide basic training in recordsmanagement to city clerks in NorthwestIowa. Following a technical assistance visitto a Northwest Iowa City Clerks'Associationmeeting, the Association applied for andreceived a HRDP grant to conduct recordsmanagement training for association mem-bers. In early 1997, two workshops attracted55 city clerks from towns ranging in sizefrom a few hundred to several thousand citi-zens. State Archives staff conducted thesesessions using the NHPRC funded "RecordsManagement Workshop Curriculum forLocal Government."

The city clerks received basic training inthe principles of records management and anintroduction to the application of those prin-ciples to local governments. The trainingprogram, held in Storm Lake, Iowa, repre-sented an additional step in the methodsIHRAB used to promote archival educationin the state. In this case, the board provided

t.re.v--: .... .. ... ............

ators and records keepers, IHRAB identifiednine key issues facing Iowa's archival organ-izations. The action steps IHRAB developedto guide its work for the next 3 years focusedlargely on educational efforts-presentationof workshops at statewide meetings, en-couraging other organizations to offer train-ing opportunities, encouraging local organi-zations to present workshops to local con-stituents, and presentation of specific train-ing events for targeted audiences.

Among the important features of IHRAB's1996 plan was an action step calling for thecollection or creation of "'best practices"information to be distributed to repositoriesthroughout the state. The resulting brochuresrepresent the board's opinion of effective.practical advice for records keepers. Thesehelpful brochures have been distributed to alllocal historical and genealogical societiesand museums in Iowa. as well as to all whohave applied for HRDP grants. The bro-chures will soon be available on the IHRABhomepage (a part of the State HistoricalSociety of Iowa homepage), and will havelinks established from the Iowa StateAssociation of Counties, the Iowa League of

Municipalities, and the State Library ofIowa. IHRAB's goal is to distribute the bro-chures as widely as possible within the stateas a means of improving the care providedfor valuable historical resources.

While the "best practices" brochures arean important step in providing basic guid-ance to local repositories, they are, at best, anintroduction to archival practices. Manyorganizations with specific questions needaccess to more detailed archival literature,but most local public libraries do not have iton their shelves. IHRAB sought to addressthis shortage by compiling six "resourcelibraries" containing selected articles andpublications on archival topics.

IHRAB placed these resource libraries invarious parts of the state, so they would beavailable to local organizations with a mini-mum of driving. The resource library housedin Des Moines is a circulating copy, so it canbe loaned to an individual, a historical organ-ization, or a local government for a limitedperiod of time. The bibliographies for theseresource libraries are included in the bestpractices brochures, so individuals are ableto identify the resource they need and obtainit either through an interlibrary loan process,by purchase, or by visiting the closestresource library site.

The best practices brochures and theresource libraries are recent additions toIHRAB's educational arsenal, so the resultsare not yet in as to their effectiveness. AsIHRAB turns the corner to the 21st century,it will continue to evaluate its educationalofferings. In addition to funding educationalworkshops with HRDP resources, the boardexpects to develop specific workshops forpresentation throughout the state, ultimatelyusing the statewide telecommunications net-work for delivery of those workshops. It willcontinue to encourage organizations to useconsultants and advisers, to attend educationalworkshops and to sponsor training workshops.

The need for continuing educational train-ing at all levels is great. For many organiza-tions, the need is for the most basic of train-ing, for others the need is for advanced train-ing. The challenge for a statewide planningbody is to be able to provide resources toorganizations at all levels of development.IHRAB believes its multilevel approachencourages local volunteer historical organi-zations and local governments to seek train-ing appropriate to their needs. +

GoRI)(ON O. HENDRICK,SO(N 1 IO'XA S STATE

ARLHI\ 1' 1.

Annoronon Vol 273 September t999 13

EDUCATING NEW MEXICO SLOCAL GOVERNMENTS

New Mexico has 33 counties and 101 munici-palities, 89 school districts, a multitude ofquasi-governmental bodies. Our population atthe last census was just over 1.5 million. Com-pared to other states, this seems a manageablenumber of entities. It isn't, and there are anumber of reasons for this. New Mexico is thefifth largest state in the country. Each govern-mental body is an independent unit of govern-ment with its own management, priorities, andconstituencies that have contributed to NewMexico's long history of resistance to centralcontrol by "The State."

AUTHoRmY (OR LACK OF IT)Local governments' need for independence

resulted in the formulation of a New MexicoPublic Records Act specifically designed toaddress public records created or maintainedby the executive branch. The Public RecordsAct does, however, allow the State RecordsAdministrator to advise and assist county andmunicipal officials in the formulation of pro-grams for disposing of their public records.The State Records Administrator serves as theexecutive director for the Commission of PublicRecords (CPR) and operates the State RecordsCenter and Archives.

The New Mexico Historical RecordsAdvisory Board (NMHRAB) is an adjunctbody of CPR. It was specifically created toparticipate in the NHPRC grant program.NMHRAB has not historically received statefunding, nor has it been independently staffed.A planning grant from the NHPRC providedthe needed impetus to resurrect the board andto obtain state support for it. Through its stra-tegic planning process, it has become a re-source to all historical record repositoriesthroughout the state, including county andmunicipal governments.

Both CPR and NMHRAB jointly addressthe educational needs of local governmentrepositories. The State Records Administratorchairs NMHRAB, and CPR staff membersprovide expertise to the board and to historicalrecords repositories.

THE ROLE OF CPRCPR, as the governing body for the State

Records Center and Archives, has a vestedinterest in preserving the public records of NewMexico throughout their life cycle. Brochuresabout CPR and its programs have been devel-oped and widely distributed. With regard to

local governments, our intent is to be a re-source in keeping with the spirit of NewMexico's Public Records Act. CPR has takena public relations approach to educating localgovernments. This approach entails acting asconsultant/trainer, as well as developing mod-els. This article will limit its discussion tomunicipal and county governments.

CONSIJULTATION

As consultants, CPR staff members provideadvice on records and archival managementpractices. For the most part, staff membersanswer questions, direct local governments toother sources, and provide advice on approachor methodology.

Records Management Division analystsprovide information or advice in response toquestions posed by local governments. Typi-cal questions are: What do we need to keep?What can be destroyed? When can we destroythem? How can the records be destroyed? Whatrecords are confidential? Is the whole file con-fidential? Who has access to our records: doesthe governing body, even if they are confiden-tial? does the public, to everything? If the rec-ords are in electronic format, does a papercopy need to be produced? Who needs to benotified and who needs to approve the de-struction? Can records be microfilmed? We'relooking at an imaging system, we'd like to putall our records on it, is that OK? How must wemaintain our records? Do we have to keep thewhole file? Does the state have standards forelectronic records?

Archives and Historical Services Divisionstaff members often advise local governmentson reformatting or converting their documents,or answer specific questions regarding how tocare for their material. Staff members are oftenasked to appraise specific records, i.e., helplocal governments identify what is historical,or help them determine what can be thrownaway. The State Archives is a repository forlocal government permanent records that havebeen transferred to it.

MODELS

Since CPR has no authority over local gov-ernments, it develops models that can be mod-ified and adopted by various local govern-mental entities. CPR adopts general recordretention and disposition schedules (RRDS)for local governments. There are two types ofRRDS: those for support records, and those

I~ 0.

which address the needs of particular offices,such as the county assessor, the county treas-urer, et al.

The Records Management Division devel-ops schedules with help from interested par-ties from local government. Schedules arereviewed by the RRDS Committee, which iscomprised of the State Records Administrator.the Deputy State Records Administrator, andthe directors of the Archives and HistoricalServices and Records Management Divisions.Once approved by this committee, the sched-ules are submitted to CPR for considerationand adoption.

Unlike general schedules adopted for stategovernment and filed in this manner, generalschedules adopted for local governments arenot binding, because these entities are not sub-ject to the Public Records Act. Rather, theseschedules are models that must be formallyadopted through resolution or ordinance bythe appropriate governing body. General RRDSapplying to all local governments identifysupport records common to local govern-ments, such as General AdministrativeRecords, General Financial Records, andGeneral Personnel Records.

PROGRAM RECORD RETENTION AND DISPOSIMON

SCHEDULES APPLYING TO MuNICIPALrIES

A newly updated New Mexico Municipal-ities RRDS was adopted by CPR on December30, 1998. Our latest statistics indicate that 38percent (39 out of 101) of New Mexico'smunicipalities have adopted this schedule.Schedules have also been developed formunicipal courts and for the BernalilloCounty Metro Court. Several program sched-ules applying to counties have also beendeveloped, including those for the CountyCommissioners or County Manager, CountyAssessor, County Clerk, County Sheriff,and County Treasurer. Counties are instructedthat program schedules must be used in con-junction with support schedules in order foreach entity to develop its own RRDS.

Other standards and guides have beenadopted by CPR that apply only to state agen-cies, but are provided as guides to local gov-ernments that have questions in particularareas. Although local governments are notbound by these regulations, they do act as asource of information in areas of concern tothem. New Mexico microphotography standardsprovide benchmarks that microphotography

Annoranrion Vol 27 3 Seprember 199914

(including imaging) systems must meet. Per-formance guidelines for the legal acceptanceof public records produced by informationtechnology systems provide local govern-ments with guidance for developing electron-ic records keeping systems that will withstandlegal challenges.

TRAINING

Training for local governments has focusedon consultation and presentations on recordsand archival management principles and tech-niques. We have addressed interested groupsthrough the New Mexico Municipal League.the New Mexico Association of Counties, andtheir affiliates. Most recently, we conducteda presentation at the 1999 Annual LocalGovernment Budget Conference, where weaddressed local government officials andstaffers. We took this opportunity to remindparticipants of their obligations for preservingand providing access to public records and toencourage allocation of budget resources torecords and archival management. Staff mem-bers have presented workshops to the Clerk'sAffiliate and the Treasurer's Affiliate of theAssociation of Counties. Contacts with theMunicipal League are under way to arrange aworkshop for City Clerks at the organization'sannual conference.

CPR staff conduct workshops in archivesand records management practices on behalfof NMHRAB. Barriers such as the lack ofCPR statutory authority prevent state regula-tion of local government records preservationpractices. The independent nature of local gov-ernments requires a marketing approach todevelop appropriate practices that will ensurepreservation of historical local governmentrecords.

THE Roi.E OF NMHRABNMHRAB has no official standing in state

government. As an advisory board, it has thefreedom to recommend best practices withoutthe attendant stigma of being mandated by"The State." With the publication of its strate-gic plan, Capturing 400 Years of RecordedHistor, it developed several strategies for im-proving the condition of the public records ofNew Mexico.

When NMHRAB began its strategic plan-ning, it knew local governments had issuesthat needed to be addressed. Every county andsome municipalities participated in the projectand greatly influenced the direction of theresulting strategic planks. The New MexicoHistorical Records Repositories Surveyrevealed that the repositories' most pressingproblems related to finding aids and access,training, staff, preservation and conservation,and space, with significant interest also in

storage conditions and appraisal.To address these pressing problems,

NMHRAB applied for and was awarded anNHPRC grant with three objectives: imple-ment the board's strategic plan: develop anddeliver a training program that addressesrepositories' most pressing needs; and create aregrant program that will provide additionalresources for training and developing recordsprograms in New Mexico. The regrant pro-gram, called the New Mexico HistoricalRecords Grant Program, and a schedule oftraining was developed soon after the grantwas awarded. These two components of thegrant are NMHRAB's mechanism for educat-ing local governments.

NMHRAB obtained funds from the statelegislature and from the NHPRC for the pro-gram. Grants are awarded annually to appli-cants who demonstrate need, financially andprogrammatically, and show commitment tosolving historical records problems. Projectsmust address the funding priorities ofNMHRAB as set forth in Capturing 400 Yearsof Recorded History: A Strategic Plan. The

Board's Number One funding priority is todevelop training programs or opportunities forhistorical records custodians to use basic man-agement tools in the care and preservation ofrecords in their custody.

In 1998, the New Mexico legislature appro-priated $25,000 to match the $50,000 NHPRCgrant awarded in December 1998. A 25 percentor better cash or in-kind match is expected fromthe recipient. Guidelines and an applicationform were developed and issued in November1998 to repositories throughout New Mexico.Thirty-two proposals were submitted against aFebruary 15th deadline. The Board ranked theproposals and awarded grants ranging from$500 to $8,500 to 16 repositories.

Local governments received only a smallnumber of the grants awarded because thegrant proposals submitted were not sufficient-ly developed. To address this problem, at leasttwo grant-writing workshops will be conduct-ed during September and October 1999, pre-ceding the next call for proposals on November1, 1999. Thereafter, the Grants Administratorhired under the NHPRC grant will providedirect assistance in grant preparation.

Thanks to a grant from the NHPRC,NMHRAB has put together a program of"free" training that will be offered throughoutthe state of New Mexico between December1, 1998. and November 30, 2000. Our princi-ple audience is local government, althoughworkshops are open to all historical recordrepositories. Our training schedule offers1 -day, I X-day, and 2-day workshops in recordsmanagement and archives topics to manyareas of the state that are desperately in need

of such training.Basic Records Management is a 1 2-day

workshop that will be offered 3 times over thenext 2 years in various locales. The work-shops instruct participants in the basic princi-ples of records management, including termi-nology, development and use of record reten-tion and disposition schedules, electronicrecords issues, and vital records.

Other issues pertaining to electronic rec-ords will be addressed by bringing in outsidesources to conduct a session on electronicrecords that builds on the basic concepts in-troduced in the Basic Records ManagementWorkshop.

Archival Management training was designedto build experience incrementally. Basic pre-servation and conservation offered in PreservingNew Mexico's Historical Record provides thehands-on training most requested by reposito-ries. This 2-day workshop instructs participantsin the nature of materials, environment andstorage, management issues, selecting docu-ments for preservation. reformatting. care andhandling, and conservation treatments. Theworkshop is scheduled for three differentdates and places during the grant period.

Appraisal of Archival Collections, a 1-dayworkshop held August 2, 1999. providedinstruction to participants on using their mis-sion statement to develop a collection policy,using the collection policy to appraise collec-tions, and developing forms needed to docu-ment donations to collections. The sessionconcluded with an exercise that required par-ticipants to create a mission statement, thenoutline a collection policy, and finally identifyand appraise records using the model collec-tion policy for the Carrizozo High SchoolArchives.

This will be followed by a HoldingsMaintenance workshop funded through theNew Mexico Historical Records Grant Pro-gram in October. There is a nominal fee of $20per person for this workshop that will beoffered in three different locations around thestate. The November session is Arrangementand Description. This 2-day workshop prom-ises to teach participants the principles ofarrangement and of developing a descriptiveprogram. Since developing finding aids wasthe most pressing need identified by all repos-itories, we expect this session to be wellattended. Advanced sessions in photographpreservation and in automating finding aidswill be offered in 2000. A full schedule oftraining offered is available at www. state.nm.us/cpr.

And so it goes....

L. EL.INE OIAH IS NEW iNI\XICO'S STATE RECORDS

AD\IINISTRATOR.

Annotatr on Vol 27 3 September 1999 15

HELPING TO SAVE

the Macbetanz Film CollectionIN ALASKA

THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA

FAIRBANKS (UAF) is notable forits focus on regional studies. Thecollections of its Alaska andPolar Regions Department (APR)are therefore the university'score research materials in thehumanities and the social sci-ences. With public and privatesupport for this commitment,APR has built the world's largestand most diverse holdings ofAlaska historical and culturalrecords, and continues to sustainthe most comprehensive collect-ing program in this field.

APR's collections are heavilyused despite the university's iso-lated location. There were morethan 2,000 daily visits to theResearch Room in fiscal year1998. These were mainly for useof archives, manuscripts, photo-graphs, and rare maps, as mostof the rare books have beenmicrofilmed. Researchers pur-chased 20,000 photocopies and Fred ant

tion in t2,300 photographic prints, slides, andSarc

and digital files. The Oral HistoryProgram circulated 573 cassettecopies of interviews.

The Alaska Film Archives in APR is themost important repository of archival filmfootage in and about Alaska, although theaccessioned holdings of 1,616 films and3,704 videotapes may seem small by Lower48 standards. The only other current archi-val collection program for moving imagesin Alaska is the Alaska Moving ImagePreservation Association (AMIPA), a non-profit organization that depends entirely onvolunteers and annual fund-raising. TheAlaska Film Archives is far stronger inearly material and in film, although AMIPAhas larger holdings of broadcast and docu-mentary videotapes.

Alaska pioneers prized their historic

Id Sacra Alachetanz celebrate passage of Alaska statehbhis publicity stillfrom their lecture tours. Photo courta Machetanz.

opportunity and recognized that film wasideal to capture a modem history that coin-cided with the moving picture era. How-ever, Alaska's extreme conditions mademoving images very rare in comparisonwith still photographs. Moving pictures wereinvented just in time to capture gold rushfever on the Seattle docks in 1897, but stillimages are the only known visual record ofthe arrivals at Skagway and Dyea. The ear-liest motion pictures of Alaska show turn-of-the-century Klondike gold miners work-ing a sluice box and rocker boxes, as well asmule pack trains.

The heart of the Alaska Film Archives israw footage, produced mainly between the1920s and the 1960s. The typical film-maker was an amateur or an independent

ood legisla- commentary in annual lec-tesy of Fred ture tours in the Lower 48

(115,000 feet).

For several years, theAlaska Film Archives has been supportedby year-to-year allocations from RasmusonLibrary general funds as well as by grantsand gifts. The position of film archivist willbe funded half-time from the library's regu-lar budget beginning in January 2000. Thiswill sustain public services, outreach, col-lection development, accessioning, envi-ronmental monitoring, and fund-raising at aresponsible and progressive level.

Major preservation and access work willcontinue to depend on external funding.APR's strategy has been to seek out fundingfor each of the major subject strengths inthe collection from agencies and founda-tions that share those topical interests. Its1998-1999 project "Alaska Films Before

Annotaoton Vo 27 3 Seprember 1999

r - ,

professional. The typicalproduct was 16mm silentfootage. The typical purposewas to document some keyaspect of Alaska's ecology,economy, or culture. Here aresome examples:

* The naturalist Adolph Muriefilmed over several decadesfor his magisterial studies ofbirds, mammals, wolves, andgrizzlies in Denali (15,000feet of film).* Hallie Cordle, an equipmentsalesman, filmed gold-miningoperations throughout theinterior in the 1930s (5,500feet).* Fred and Sara Machetanzfilmed many aspects of Alaskalife in the 1950s. Their majorproductions were Alaska SledDog (for Walt Disney) and thedocumentaries that Fredshowed with his own live

16

Statehood," which will result in the preser-vation of 225 reels of raw footage bydocumentary film makers Fred and SaraMachetanz, was funded by an NHPRCgrant of $33,718.

The Machetanz Alaskan film collection isincomparable. It offers a fascinating viewof pre-statehood Alaska from the resident'sperspective, captured with an artist's eyethrough the camera's lens, covering nearlytwo decades of varied activities. As DirkTordoff, the assistant archivist for film atthe Alaska Film Archives, puts it: "This is awonderful collection. It literally offers awindow on the past, allowing the viewer tosee Alaska and Alaskans in a different era.Some of the activities recorded are nolonger done."

On one reel, an Eskimo hunter on thecoast (Unalakleet) uses his dog team to haula kayak over the spring ice to hunt seals. Atthe edge of the ice pack, he is faced with theproblem of securing the dog team. Heresolves the matter using skills and toolspassed down for generations. by chipping asimple but ingenious tie-down from the ice.After tying the dogs securely, he is off onhis hunt. On another reel, the same hunterteaches his young son how to handle thedog team and the kayak so that one day hecan repeat the cycle.

The Machetanz collection containsimages of many other interesting and his-toric events:

* Deep in the forested interior, on the banksof a glacier-fed river (the Tanana), anAthabascan fish camp bustles with activity.Simple spruce poles are converted into afish wheel for gathering the winter'ssalmon from the murky water. An elderlywoman converts sheets of birch bark intobowls and other implements, deftly stitch-ing the bark together with roots.* Far to the south of both seal hunter andfish camp, a log cabin is literally carved outof the virgin forest. The camera records theclearing of the land and the cutting andshaping of logs to form an artist's house andstudio.* Travelers on the newly completed butprimitive ALCAN Highway change flattires, wait for construction workers to repaira wooden bridge, and watch a bush planetake to the sky using the rough gravel sur-face of the road as a runway.* On a remote coast in the Far North, a hugelanding craft disgorges trucks and construc-tion equipment with a sense of urgency. TheCold War is heating up. and the equipmentwill be used to build the Distant EarlyWarning (DEW) Line, a radar systemrushed into service to keep the Soviets atbay over the top of the world.

LEFT: Dirk Tordoff assistantarchivist for film at the AlaskaFilin Arcbives, looks over aMAachetanz film. Photo by MattHage for the Fairbanks DailyjNeus-AlinerABOVE: An Eskimo mnan builds afish trap near the UnalakleetRiver 1948. From the Fred andSara Mlachetanz Collection,Alaska Film Architves.

Fred and Sara Machetanz were therewith camera rolling to record dog teamscompeting in winter games. children play-ing baseball, shoppers marveling at a mod-ern grocery store, gold miners toiling forriches, and happy celebrants taking to thestreets in an impromptu parade whenAlaska became a state. The couple spenttime on the lecture circuit in the Lower 48providing commentaries on their Alaskadocumentaries, but found the schedule toohectic after the birth of their son. Theyreturned to Alaska. where Fred took up anew career as an artist. Fred Machetanz theartist is now considered a national treasureby many: he and Sara are still painting andwriting in and about Alaska.

The Machetanzes' most famous film wasAlaskan Sled Dog. produced in Unalakleetfor Walt Disney. Released in 1956, themotion picture tells the story of the boyNip-Chik and his dog Nan-Nook, whogrows from puppy to leader of Nip-Chik'ssled team. Alaskan Sled Dog was made inclose collaboration with the Disney Studio,which provided a cinemascope lens for thefilming. The Machetanzes received creditfor the filming, something Disney rarelypermitted. Their familiarity with the peopleand place allowed them to capture intimate

community life missingher early documentarieslaskan Eskimos.Film is the latest additionto APR's comprehensive

curatorial program, al-though the library begancollecting films in the1960s. The first filmspecialist was hired in1978, based in Media

Services with Archivesparticipation. His mainchievements were to con-t all nitrate film to acetatestock and perform foot-

ntification and cataloging01 .. JUIcc,ho tic uitiuii w/ac LUSt. in1 LL

Ul 'JU ICCIN. I IC P[StLIU1I Was IUt)S 111 l1C

collapse of oil pipeline revenues in 1985,but the Archives continued public servicefor the cataloged films.

The Film Archives was re-staffed in 1993with gifts totaling $150,000 from theNational Bank of Alaska. Since that time,the priority has been to extend basic acces-sibility to the entire collection while begin-ning to appraise for research value andpreservation needs. These are the achieve-ments to date: co ntinu ed oi page 19J

Annotrarion Vol 27 3 Secrember 1999

/

17

DOCUMENTING A COMMONWEALTH (c o n t i n u e d fro m p a g e I 1

1. determine the universe of human activities that comprise lifein Massachusetts to understand what should be documented.2. recognize documentary problems and assess existing holdingsin repositories to identify gaps in documentation,3. share information about proposed under-documented areas anddocumentation categories, and4. work together to find collaborative solutions to problems inidentifying and preserving documentation in these areas.

These are ambitious goals. Even if the historical records commu-nity agreed that certain areas of Massachusetts life were under-doc-umented, could communities mobilize to identify, acquire, and pre-serve records in these areas? Nationwide, much progress has beenmade in narrow areas. Some state historical agencies, such as thosein New York and Wisconsin, have assessed the status of documen-tation in their states and have identified some documentary objec-tives. The Center for the History of Physics at the AmericanInstitute of Physics, accessible online at www.aip.org/historv/index.html, has worked to identify and, where necessary, place doc-umentation of that science in repositories. Intra-institutional docu-mentation methodologies have been proposed and tested in univer-sity and hospital settings. However, there are no existing models forcomprehensive, broad-based, documentation efforts.

MHRAB proposed and supported a variety of efforts in this area.While acknowledging the difficulties that a broad-based collabora-tive effort presents, MHRAB pledged to work with the historicalrecords community to seek solutions to this challenge. The boardpursued two different approaches: (1) to research and develop abroad typology for the documentation of Massachusetts, and (2) toprovide tools and training to help local repositories plan to docu-ment communities.

WHAT WAS THE PROCESS?

The series of demonstration projects began as part of MHRAB'sStrategic Planning project. First, the MHRAB project staff collect-ed information on documentation projects and summarized infor-mation on its Web site. Second, MHRAB formed a working groupof individuals involved in planning or implementing documentationprojects. This group included the project staff of an NHPRC-fund-ed documentation project at Northeastern University (NancyRichard and Joan Krizack); the initiator of a town-level collabora-tive documentation project in Monson, MA (Theresa Percy); andthe town clerk, library director, and museum curator ofProvincetown, MA, who were in the early stages of discussion fora town-level documentation plan. These representatives sharedinformation, identified common needs, and proposed collaborativeactivities.

Third, MHRAB hired archival consultant Kelcy Sheperd toundertake a documentation study in Massachusetts. This projectentailed creating a broad list of categories representing specificareas of significant priority for documentation of the state. The listwas derived from social science studies of human activity used byarchivists to analyze holdings. Scholars, archivists, and other indi-viduals with expertise in Massachusetts history, culture, and lifewere asked to suggest specific subcategories of importance. Aftercreation of the list, the consultant, using a limited number of

Brochures created bj' MHRAB as part of the Strategic planning projectand the Documentar, Heritage Grant Program.

subject areas, assessed what records were available and how theywere classified in published bibliographic information aboutMassachusetts repositories holdings. Although time-intensive, thisproject revealed an expected wide range of classifications used forarchival collections; in addition, many collections we knew existedsimply were not available using bibliographic sources. MHRABcontinues to solicit input from scholars and archivists on categoriesof significance. In particular, MHRAB has included the creation ofdocumentation tools and methodologies as a funding priority andwill facilitate the ongoing analysis of Massachusetts categories.

A fourth project was the development of documentation tools forgeopolitical (local) communities. MHRAB was particularly inter-ested in supporting collaborative documentation efforts in neigh-borhoods, municipalities, and regions. In fact, local autonomy andpride could be used to stimulate documentation one town at a timein the Commonwealth while concurrently carrying out statewideassessment and categorization projects.

Working closely with the documentation working group and asimilar working group on continuing education and professionaldevelopment, MHRAB proposed a three-part series of workshopsfocusing on several areas where little or no training was available.To provide Massachusetts records caretakers with the tools neededto document communities, MHRAB partnered with the Bay StateHistorical League, the Massachusetts Historical Commission,the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners, and theMassachusetts Regional Library Systems to create a curriculum toinclude collaborative community documentation projects.

The project, funded partially by the NHPRC as part of theStrategic Planning project and partially by a grant from theMassachusetts Foundation for the Humanities, resulted in a 3-dayworkshop series held over the course of I month. Workshop I,"Understanding Archives," defines the role of the archivist and theelements necessary to develop a complete archival program.Workshop II, "Documenting Community," the heart and the soul ofthe workshop series, is based on the preliminary work noted above.This workshop provides a step-by-step guide to developing andimplementing a community documentation plan. It focuses onhow to collaborate and work effectively in a community setting.Workshop III, "Strategic Planning," utilizes the skills learned inboth of the previous parts and encourages participants to thinkabout how to plan their institution's future. These workshops

Annoranon Vol 27 3 Seprember 199918

provide a checklist of activities, methods for collaborating, andtools for self-assessment and topical analysis.

The "Preserving Our Community Heritage" workshops havebeen very popular. Participants have been interested in learninghow to carry out a collaborative documentation planning project intheir communities. MHRAB hopes that these workshop series willencourage participants to consider the documentation implicationsthat their decisions make on the community and states, even if spe-cific documentation projects are not initiated in every communityin the state.

In general. MHRAB has found the historical records communityto be interested in determining statewide documentation goals anddeveloping a documentation plan. However, much work needs to bedone before broad implementation. Ongoing research, developmentof broad program tools, and successful community models must beinitiated and shared across the state. One important step in thisdirection is the recent initiation of the NHPRC-funded grassrootsregrant project, "Documentary Heritage Grant Program." Thisgrant program takes the preliminary documentation work done byMHRAB one step further by making documentation projects afunding priority.

The "Documentary Heritage Grant Program" will fund projectsthat plan for or implement collaborative community documentationprojects and that further the development and implementation oftools and methods to enhance the documentation of Massachusettshistory. This grant program has just begun. and we look forward tosome model projects.

Although there is much work to be done to accomplish our goals.documentation planning is a priority for the Commonwealth.MHRAB continues to look for ways to best determine the docu-mentation obstacles and opportunities in Massachusetts. By facili-tating research projects, seeking the ongoing input of scholars andexperts. providing training, creating tools for community documen-tation planning, and providing funding opportunities, MHRAB isaddressing its documentation priority, one town at a time.

For more information about Massachusetts Historical RecordsAdvisory Board projects, please visit MHRAB's Web site atwww'.state.'na.'us/sec/arc/arcaac/aacintro htmnl. Many products areavailable online. Telephone the Massachusetts Historical RecordsCoordinator or Field Archivist at (617)727-2816, or send an e-mailmessage to areddin@sec.state.ma.uts. We would like very much tohear your feedback on our current work. 4i

AN,-(;ELA REI)II\N 1, STATE HISTORICALI RECORDpE COORDINVIOKR FOR IIIE

C,IIMONWNVEALTH OF MAS.ACHU SETT;.

MACHETANZ FILM COLLECTION ( .* tinl f tc J'r 11 P I ce I 7 J

*Approximately 50 percent of the film holdings and 90 percent ofthe videotape holdings have been accessioned with minimal identi-fication and description. The resulting collection index is printedout semi-annually. can be searched in the Film Archives withMicrosoft Access software, and will be included in an ongoing proj-ect of online access to indexes.*Sixteen percent of the accessioned items have been cataloged inUSMARC format in the UA online catalog.*The first-cut appraisal for research value, performed in the courseof accessioning, has been selecting about 70 percent of previouslyunexamined items for addition to the collection. The criteria weredeveloped informally in 1993 and adopted formally in 1997.*The first-cut appraisal for preservation is identifying about sevenpercent of the accessioned films as urgently needing new negativesbecause of advanced deterioration, then ranking them by researchvalue.

In 1997 all archival films were moved to a vault with climatecontrol that maintains the temperature at 48 to 50 degreesFahrenheit and the humidity at 35 to 45 percent. Access is restrict-ed to archives personnel. There are heat and smoke detectors withautomatic reporting as well as sprinklers.

All films are initially kept in clean metal containers stacked hor-izontally on metal shelves. As films are fully reviewed or copiedonto new film stock, they are rehoused using acid-free cores andpolypropylene containers. About 30 percent of the collection hasbeen rehoused since 1993.

Use is mainly through videotape copies, which protects the orig-inals by making it unnecessary to handle them again, and also pro-vides cheap and easy access. VHS copies are available for inhouseviewing, and also for interlibrary loan and purchase wheneverdonor agreements permit. The Film Archives provides selectedBeta SP footage to meet the needs of documentary filmmakers, andmakes Beta copies of the more fragile films to permit future videoduplication without re-handling the originals.

The Film Archives is rapidly building a constituency as filters areidentified and the information is disseminated. In the past 3 years,the Film Archives has provided footage for documentaries to theNational Film Board of Canada. Cinenova Canada. Gentle GiantProductions of Denmark. Faction Films/BBC, Cezka-Televise ofthe Czech Republic, NBC, the Turner Broadcasting System,Holland-America Westours. GrayLine of Alaska, and public andcommercial television stations in Fairbanks, Anchorage, Barrow,and Pittsburgh (PA). There were 73 substantive inquiries in fiscalyear 1998. about half again as many as in the previous year, andthere were 93 in fiscal year 1999.

The NHPRC's grant to the Alaska Film Archives will make itpossible for future generations to experience life in pre-statehoodAlaska through the films of Fred and Sara Machetanz.

SULASN GRI(G, G\HO) HEAD. R\bMNUI,oN LIIR:\RAYI AL:,SIA AND PoLkAR RE(,ION'

D)EPARrNIEN, AND DIRK tIORDOFF, IllHF A1STIDANT ARCHI]SiT FOR FILIM A 'IHI

AL\sLx FILM ARCiIIIVE. GE\NIEROI LY PROXDEI) ASSISTAN(IF IN THF PP,FPAR,I[ION OF

I HI ARTICILE

AnnorDron Vo 273 September 1999 19

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PUBLICATIONS

AND RECORDS COMMISSION (NHPRC)NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION

700 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW, RooM 111

WASHINGTON, DC 20408-0001

Official BusinessPenalty for Private Use $300

FORWARDING AND RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED

Check here to remove your name fromthe mailing list(Return this poge to the above address)

Check here to change your address(Enter correct information on label andreturn to obove address)

Visit us on the Web at www.nara.gov/nara/nhprc/or e-mail us at nhprc@archl.nara.gov

BULK RATEPOSTAGE & FEES PAID

NATIONAL ARCHIVES ANDRECORDS ADMINISTRATION

PERMIT No. G-293

In this publicity stillfrom their lecture tours, Fred and Sara Machetanz pose with an Alaska sled dog, the subject of a 1957 motionpicture theyfilmnedfor the Disney Studio. Photo courtesy of Fred and Sara Machetanz. A related story on the MAachetanz FilmCollection begins on page 16