Putting It Into Practice

Preparing a Preservation Plan

Setting Preservation Priorities

While it provides a great deal of useful information, a survey report cannot provide a complete analysis of the many additional factors that must be considered when setting priorities for actual preservation action. Some factors—such as available funding for preservation, staff time and expertise, and user demand for collections—change as institutional circumstances change. Other factors that affect preservation priorities require an in-depth understanding of the institution and its collections that only staff members possess, such as the relative value of collections to the institution and political considerations.

There is consensus regarding the issues to consider when prioritizing potential preservation actions. The following criteria are taken from Preservation Planning: Guidelines for Writing a Long-Range Plan, referenced in Additional Resources:

Collection-Specific Criteria

• Use—Materials that are used frequently, whether consulted by researchers or exhibited routinely, may be at higher risk than other collections.
• Storage—Collections that are stored under adverse conditions, whether environmental or in damaging enclosures, may require prompt preservation action.
• Condition—Items or collections in fragile condition may be at risk of loss unless they receive attention quickly.
• Value—Either absolute value (rarity, monetary worth, intrinsic, or associational value) and/or relative value of collections to an institution may influence preservation priorities. Whether collections have long- or short-term value to an institution will also influence decision making.
• Format—Whether materials need to be preserved in their original format will also influence priorities.

Overall Criteria

• Impact—Those actions that will result in dramatic improvement in current conditions or a slowing of deterioration, or that will affect the greatest number of items, will often be the highest priority.
• Feasibility—This factor is essential; it includes staffing levels and expertise, financial considerations (outside funding, operating costs, expenses for materials and services), policy and procedural changes required, and political considerations. Even if the impact of a preservation action is high, it may be given a low priority if implementation is not feasible.
• Urgency—There will always be some activities that require immediate action; collections may be damaged or lost, or an opportunity to act on a particular project may be lost if action is not taken.

In general, preservation activities that will have high impact (e.g., improved climate control, rehousing of a collection, or microfilming) and are highly feasible (e.g., the staffing, time, and money is available to carry them out in the near future) will be the highest priority. Activities with high impact but low feasibility (e.g., replacing the HVAC system) may be given a lower priority until circumstances make them more feasible, while actions that are feasible but have only minimal impact (such as installing UV sleeves on fluorescent lights) may or may not be undertaken, depending on such factors as cost, visibility within the institution, and collection value.

  See an Impact/Feasibility Worksheet (PDF, 248k) that will help you to set priorities.