Archives Accreditation Workshop york presentation show
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


Archives Accreditation Workshop york presentation show



Presentation from the workshop on Archvies Accreditation at York in Jan 2012, the first step in the co-creation of the archives accreditation standard and scheme.

Presentation from the workshop on Archvies Accreditation at York in Jan 2012, the first step in the co-creation of the archives accreditation standard and scheme.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Early on the decision was made to ensure that this would be a UK wide scheme.The scheme should clearly define itself as a standards scheme that drives improvement by externally validating and accrediting achievement, as distinct from a continuous improvement tool based on self evaluation.An externally validated process that provides organisations and services with a methodology for maintaining and raising their performance, against agreed professional standards. Archives Accreditation will be driven and owned by the archives sectorThe scheme will be purpose built to meet the needs of archives and their users. It will be co-created with the archives sector to provide a practical working tool that delivers support and encourages development where it is most wanted and needed.Archives Accreditation will focus on user needs and experiences The scheme will recognise and celebrate the enormous diversity that exists between archives and the communities which they serve across the UK. Archives Accreditation will acknowledge local needs and priorities, accommodate differences and be scaleable and proportionate in its expectations. Archives Accreditation will be affordable and deliver value for moneyThe scheme will help archive-holding organisations employ minimum resource to maximum effect. It will be streamlined with other relevant tools and data-gathering processes, including Museum Accreditation, to eliminate unnecessary duplication of effort.  Archives Accreditation will replace The National Archives’ current Self Assessment Scheme and will dovetail with processes for securing Place of Deposit and Approved Archive status, and with monitoring arrangements relating to Section 60 Schemes produced in Wales. Archives Accreditation will promote confidence, trust and enjoyment in archivesThe scheme will be externally validated and highly visible, providing the public and funding bodies with the evidence and reassurance of responsible practice, high quality services and money well spent.The National Archives Self Assessment Scheme will continue to operate until such time as a new Archives Accreditation Scheme becomes fully functional. ???
  • Archives Accreditation will promote confidence, trust and enjoyment in archivesAn Archives Accreditation Scheme is expected to bring benefits across six core areas. These may be summarised as ‘The 6 Ps’: Performance: a UK-wide quality standard which offers a benchmark and stimulus for gauging performance, recognising achievement, ensuring value for money and driving continuous improvement Profile: a mechanism for raising awareness and understanding of archives, building confidence and credibility both within parent organisations and externally People: a process to help archive-holding organisations adapt and respond to user needs and interests and to support workforce development Partnerships: a tool to help archives examine their offer more widely and to encourage collaborative working within and between organisations Planning: a robust framework for facilitating forward planning, improving procedures and policy, and reducing organisational risk Patronage: a badge of recognition which demonstrates quality services to supporters, donors and grant-making bodies, strengthening funding applications, attracting philanthropic giving and fostering investor trust
  • The scheme should clearly define itself as a standards scheme thatexternally validates and accredits achievement, as distinct from acontinuous improvement tool based on self-evaluation.The scheme should be purpose built to meet the needs of archives andshould not seek to adopt wholesale models designed for otherdisciplines and sectors.
  • I can get the text boxes on this to appear seperately
  • State we mean USERS in the widest sense including internal

Archives Accreditation Workshop york presentation show Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Co-creating Archives Accreditation Workshop 27th January 2012 Janice Tullock Associates
  • 2. Thinking about accreditation• What, in your opinion and experience, would make an Archives Accreditation Scheme successful in improving your service?• Please suggest up to 3 key points in order of importance
  • 3. Overview of the ProjectPurpose: to Design an Archives Accreditation Scheme for the UKAims to be :• A standards scheme that drives improvement by externally validating and accrediting achievement• Purpose built to meet the needs of archives• Driven and owned by the archives sector• Focused on user needs and experiences• Affordable and deliver value for money• Open to all archives that meet basic eligibility criteria• Aligned to museum Accreditation• Replace the Self Assessment Scheme (for local government in England); dovetails with Public Record Place of Deposit and Approved Archive status and S60 monitoring.• To align with other UK archive programmes.
  • 4. Benefits of archives accreditation Or isn’t this the wrong time for this?
  • 5. Work to date• Stage 1: – Scope the aims and aspirations of partners, explore best practice models and examine how these could be transferred. – to explore how a standard should be developed to ensure sector support – To identify possible models – to assess what resources might be required to pilot, deliver and manage the standard.• Stage 2: – establish partnerships with strategic bodies and sector stakeholders – set scheme scope and parameters – conduct post-CSR review of delivery mechanisms and budgets – set up sector working groups• Stage 3: – Co-creation with the sector
  • 6. Stage 1 research : A precis• Review of the benefits and issues arising from Self- Assessment process in England and Wales• Examination & analysis of other models and discussion of improvement tool v accreditation scheme: • Self-improvement tools: – goal = achieving sustainable excellence – do not seek to accredit, recognise, or rank • Accreditation Schemes – certificate excellence or achievement of defined standards – externally validated, but may incorporate self-evaluation – formal ‘badge of approval’
  • 7. Models : Key learning points• Eligibility – Archives and/or records management – what’s being assessed? – Securing corporate buy-in• Model type – Self-improvement tool or Accreditation Scheme?• Process – Directive, or flexible and modular? – Proportionate
  • 8. Models : Learning points• Validation – small, focussed review/validation teams – use of peer reviewers• Costs – Fee charging for validation services common• Support – clear, coordinated guidance essential – one-stop-shop – quality rather than quantity – value of people support
  • 9. Stage 2 research• Refinement due to governmental policy changes• Changes due to the demise of MLA and transfer to TNA
  • 11. Pre-qualification or ‘milestone’ markers Options • for organisations on a journey towards full accreditation1. Same structure as revised Museum Minimum standardsAccreditation Scheme; • common to all museum and archive applicants2. Request changes to the proposed • museums onlymodules for Museum Accreditation; • archives only3. Create additional modules; or4. Create different modules. Additional standards STANDARDS/ • Supplementary standards for certain categories of REQUIREMENTS archives and museums • ‘Silver’ standards • ‘Gold’ standards 1. Prescriptive delivery process GRADING / GUIDANCE DELIVERY & SUPPORT directed by the awarding body; MODULES LEVELS PROCESS or 2. More flexible, modular approach, offering applicants choice ASSESSMENT 1. Single minimum standard like Museum 1. TNA & MLA streamlining Accreditation; 2. MDO and/or Museum or Accreditation Officer changes 2. Stepped awards e.g. 3. Peer support networks • Star ratings (TNA Self-Assessment) 4. Centralised online guidance • Standard, Silver and Gold Awards (Artsmark) 1. Self evaluation • Levels of Excellence (EFQM Excellence Model 2. Desk review recognition awards) 3. In-house, external or mixed review/validation teams • Stepping Stones – 4. Peer reviewers Foundation, Intermediate, Full Award 5. Independent consultant assessors (International Schools Award) 6. In-house, external or mixed Moderation or Awards Panels 7. External third party accreditation bodies (e.g. UKAS)
  • 12. Recommendations •Identify common standards with museums •Develop standards specific to archives, and to different archive types •National administrative structure, coordinated centrally by TNA •Same sections as revised STANDARDS / •Open invitation process Museum Accreditation REQUIREMENTS •Flexible, modular approach Scheme: •Some direction and prioritisation •Organisational health by national assessing bodies •Collections •Users & their experience MODULES GRADING / GUIDANCE & DELIVERY LEVELS SUPPORT PROCESS ASSESSMENT •Core (minimum) standards – weighted to different archive types •Develop regional partnerships •Basic level + 1 or 2 enhanced •Create peer support networks levels •Develop central UK digital resource •Develop UK training •Nationally-managed assessment process, programme and networks moderated by a UK Panel/Committee through ARA •Level of validation for X% new applicants; X% returns •Small mixed review teams including peer reviewers •Combined committee structure with sub-panels in partnership with Museums Accreditation Scheme •Widen Committee/Panel membership to include other sectors (e.g. education, health, business)
  • 13. Discuss: The Building Block Approach1. What might work and why?2. What might not work and why?3. Are there other options? STANDARDS/ REQUIREMENTS MODULES GRADING / GUIDANCE & DELIVERY LEVELS SUPPORT PROCESS ASSESSMENT
  • 14. The plan for co-creation• The creation of a “destruction” document• Series of workshops to introduce our thinking• Webinar – 9 Feb• By the 6 Feb online environment will be complete and you will be emailed joining information for the online discussions• The online forum will be web based, accessible and encourage short sharp contributions.
  • 15. Co-creating the Standard – Destruction Document layout Sections : 1. Organisational Health 2. Collections 3. Users and their experiences
  • 16. Co-creating the Standard – Destruction Document layout• Divided into : – Headline - Area of work – Objective - The goal of this section – Standard – The specific requirement – Learn more - More detail – Evidence – Resources
  • 17. Sample1 Organisational Health1.3 Appropriate management arrangementsObjective: The interests of stakeholders and collections are served through the responsible management of the archive service.Standard: The archive service is an effective organisation that is well managed and able to provide evidence of the requirements outlined below1.3.1 The service has a satisfactory management structure from the governing body to the user
  • 18. Headlines1. What’s missing?2. What’s described wrongly?
  • 19. Sample Section1. What works?2. What doesn’t work?3. What would be your preferred text?
  • 20. Thank you !