Downloaded 29 times
Uploaded byIna Smith
Criteria for a trusted institutional repository
This document discusses the criteria for a trusted institutional repository. It begins by defining a trusted digital repository as one that provides reliable long-term access to managed digital resources for its designated community. It then outlines several key criteria for a trusted institutional repository, including accepting responsibility for long-term maintenance, applying common standards, and regularly evaluating systems. The document also summarizes several methodologies for assessing trusted repositories, such as the ISO 16363 standard. Finally, it discusses principles of trusted repositories like commitment to preservation, adequate technical infrastructure, and fulfillment of dissemination requirements.
More Related Content
Similar to Criteria for a trusted institutional repository
Criteria for a trusted institutional repository
- 1. 1 Criteria for atrusted institutional repository Ina Smith 30 March 2016 Presented during the IR Workshop University of Pretoria
- 2. Agenda • Definition • Tools •Criteria
- 3. DSpace is OAI-PMHCompliant
- 4. Articles, theses, dissertations Data & datasets ResearchLifecycle DMP
- 5. What is atrusted institutional repository? (1) “A trusted digital repository is one whose mission is to provide reliable, long‐term access to managed digital resources to its designated community, now and in the future.” (RLG‐OCLC Report 2002)
- 6. What is atrusted institutional repository? (2) • Accepts responsibility for long‐term maintenance of digital resources • Organizational system that supports long term viability of repository & digital material • Demonstrates fiscal responsibility & sustainability • Applies commonly accepted conventions & standards to ensure ongoing management, access, security
- 7. What is atrusted institutional repository? (3) • Regularly evaluates/audits the system (internal) • Implement policies, practices, performances that can be audited and measured • Well managed
- 8. Methodologies (1) • OAISReference Model (ISO) • Trusted digital repositories: attributes and responsibilities (RLG/OCLC) (2002) • An audit checklist for the certification of trusted digital repositories (RLG-NARA) (2005) • Trustworthy Repositories Audit and Certification: Criteria & Checklist (TRAC) (CRL) (2007)
- 9. Methodologies (2) • DataSeal of Approval (DANS) (2008) • DIN 31644 Information and documentation – Criteria for trustworthy digital archives (German Standards Committee) (2008) • Audit and certification of trustworthy digital repositories (Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems) (2011) • ISO 16363 Audit and Certification of Trustworthy Digital Repositories (2012)
- 10. Methodologies (3) • ISO16919 Requirements for Bodies Providing Audit and Certification of Candidate Trustworthy Digital Repositories • Expected outcome: development of approved audit & certification bodies in countries
- 11. European Framework forAudit & Certification • Tiered approach to certification • Data Seal of Approval: entry-level self-assessment and peer review • DIN 31644 or ISO 16363: extensive self-assessment (internal audit) • ISO 16363: full scale external audit
- 12. Data Seal ofApproval http://www.datasealofapproval.org/en/assessment/ • 16 guidelines based on criteria: • Data can be found on Internet • Data accessible • Data in usable format • Data reliable • Data identified in a unique & persistent way so that it can be referred to
- 15. What is theISO 16363 Standard? • Suite of standards, national & international level • Demonstrate trustworthy & responsible data management, stewardship • Provide direction to repositories • Demonstrates • Adherence to quality & consistency • Respect for data integrity • Commitment to long-term preservation & access
- 16. What is anISO 16363 Audit? • Internal audit (self-assessment): Preparation by repository – ISO 16363 metrics • External audit: Site visit by audit team • Formal report to repository • Certification of repository as OAIS Compliant • Maintain certification over time
- 17. Preparing for anISO 16363 self- assessment • Excel spread sheet: http://wiki.lib.sun.ac.za/index.php/SUNScholar/Au dit • Assess repository in terms of: • Organisational infrastructure • Digital object management • Infrastructure and security risk management
- 18. Organisational Infrastructure (1) •IR has defined goals for selection of digital material • Accepts responsibility to preserve digital material over long-term • Known defined community for whom access & ability to interpret digital materials will be provided • Legal & contractual rules between data creators & IR
- 19. Organisational Infrastructure (2) •Sufficient organizational structures: personnel, finance, long-term planning, continuity of service • Processes & responsibilities are defined & documented
- 20. Object management (1) •Integrity & authenticity of digital material are maintained • Strategic plan for digital preservation activities in place • Information packages for ingest, storage, dissemination are defined • Adequate documentation incl. permanent identifiers, structural, technical, rights, change metadata
- 21. Object management (2) •Digital material & related metadata packaged together for permanent preservation
- 22. Infrastructure & security •IT infrastructure secure
- 23. ISO 16919 –Auditing Body
- 24. Other auditing &certification systems
- 25. Center for ResearchLibraries TRAC/ISO 16363 https://www.crl.edu/archiving-preservation/digital-archives/metrics
- 26. International Council forScience World Data System https://www.icsu- wds.org/services/certification
- 27.
- 28. Nestor Catalogue ofCriteria for Trusted Digital Repositories Based on ISO 16363 Germany http://files.d-nb.de/nestor/ materialien/ nestor_mat_08-eng.pdf
- 29. Other • Digital AssetAssessment Tool (DAAT) Project ‐ file format testing (UK) • DINI certification criteria ‐ Deutsche Initiative für Netzwerkinformation (German Initiative for Networked Information) • Long Term Digital Preservation (LTDP) Automated Assessment – maturity level (IBM) • Moims‐rac (MOIMS‐Repository Audit and Certification)
- 30. Principles - TrustedIR (1) • Commitment to continuous maintenance of digital objects • Demonstrates organisation fitness to fulfil commitment (financial, staffing, processes) • Acquires and maintains requisite contractual and legal rights and fulfills responsibilities • Has an effective and efficient policy framework Source: https://www.crl.edu/archiving-preservation/digital-archives/metrics- assessing-and-certifying/core-re
- 31. Principles – TrustedIR (2) • Acquires and ingests digital objects based upon stated criteria that correspond to its commitments and capabilities • Maintains/ensures the integrity, authenticity and usability of digital objects it holds over time • Creates and maintains requisite metadata about actions taken on digital objects during preservation as well as about the relevant production, access support, and usage process contexts before preservation Source: https://www.crl.edu/archiving-preservation/digital-archives/metrics- assessing-and-certifying/core-re
- 32. Principles – TrustedIR (3) • Fulfills requisite dissemination requirements • Has a strategic program for preservation planning and action • Has technical infrastructure adequate to continuing maintenance and security of its digital objects Source: https://www.crl.edu/archiving-preservation/digital-archives/metrics- assessing-and-certifying/core-re
- 33. General Accepted RepositoryPractice (GARP) http://wiki.lib.sun.ac.za/index.php/SUNScholar/Audit • Section 1: Policy • Section 2: Preservation • Section 3: Sustainability • Section 4: Visibility • Section 5: Security • Section 6: Submissions • Section 7: Customisation • Section 8: Digitisation • Section 9: Promotion • Section 10: Legal • Section 11: Community • Section 12: Compliance
- 34. 34 Harvesters & harvestingfor institutional repositories Ina Smith 30 March 2016 Presented during the IR Workshop University of Pretoria
- 37. To increase visibility,IR must be OAI-PMH compliant and apply correct metadata for harvesters to recognize …
- 38.
- 39.
- 40.
- 41.
- 42. Guidelines for LiteratureRepositories (1)
- 43. Guidelines for LiteratureRepositories (2)
- 44. Guidelines for LiteratureRepositories (3)
- 45. Guidelines for LiteratureRepositories (4)
- 46.
- 47. Open Archives Initiativehttp://re.cs.uct.ac.za/
- 48. OAI-PMH Data ProviderRegistry http://gita.grainger.uiuc.edu/registry/
- 49.
- 50.
- 51. Harvesters – SANational ETD Portal http://www.netd.ac.za/
- 52.
- 53.
- 54.
- 55.
- 56. Google Scholar Profilefor IR
- 57. Next …. • Webpage for IR with supporting information • Data Seal of Approval • ISO 16363 Self-Assessment • ISO 16363 External Audit by NRF/CODATA, other SA auditing body (ISO 16919)?
- 58. Thank you! Ina Smith SciELOPlanning Manager, ASSAf ina@assaf.org.za