n.guidelines providing a consistent framework for determining the archival value of recordsLevine 1984, 292The appraisal policy specifies that four questions be asked and answered affirmatively before a records series may be transferred to the archives. The first question is: Are the materials government records as defined by Ohio law? If the answer is yes, the next question is asked: Does statute require that the record be kept permanently? These two questions usually require little professional judgment. The final two questions call upon the ability of the archivist to appraise the historical value of a series and follow closely the evidential–informational dichotomy developed by T. R. Schellenberg. First, the archivist determines if the record documents the “organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, or significant operations of the agency.” Next, the archivist determines if the record contains “significant historical information about either the state or its citizens.” To answer both of these questions, the policy guideline requires the archivist to consider the likely research potential of the series. This part of the evaluation includes a determination of whether the series is complete, usable, and unique.Ketelaar 1992, 43With regard to appraisal, attention is being given to improving policies and practices within EC institutions and to coordination with member states. Harmonization of national appraisal policies is not likely to be attained in the near future.Nesmith 2011, 43The overview might then highlight and explain why, as a result of these changes in appraisal policy, new archival value was attributed to case files. To illustrate this, for a state archives, the overview might mention a few examples—such as extensive files for military and public service personnel, and smaller series, such as one that documented a joint military and penitentiary services program that during the war used male prison inmates, conscientious objectors, prisoners of war, and those with certain psychiatric “medical” deferments (such as declared male homosexuals) to construct internment camps for Japanese Canadians, prisoner of war camps, and roads and military buildings in remote areas. The penitentiary service, as the primary administrator of the program, had custody of the case files; since most of the two hundred participants in it were inmates, the service was pleased to archive the series as evidence of its otherwise little known contribution to the war effort. The overview appraisal report need not say much more than that for this example. Its aim is to illustrate major changes in appraisal policy, and tie them generally to important overall themes, such as the evolving societal context in which records appraisal has been done.Yakel 2011, 271The Public Relations and Development Department at Wright State University sponsors the site 1967–2007—40 Years of Wright State University and urges participation . . . Interestingly, their appraisal policy is more explicit than many of the archives sites. “We reserve the right to reject images and comments that do not comply with the stated criteria. Images and comments submitted on the website will be processed within 72 hours of submission. You will receive an e-mail confirming that we have received your submission.”National Archives 2012, 4While recognising past achievements the research conducted in the course of the Appraisal Policy Project indicated that significant changes were needed to accommodate digital records, to streamline selection techniques for paper records, to provide methods which facilitate the application of consistent selection decisions for records held in a variety of media and across government departments, and to ensure records are managed in ways compliant with recent information legislation. ¶ The policy statement which follows this introduction sets out an agenda for change in methods used to select records for permanent preservation. The Appraisal Policy will be supported by standards on procedures for appraisal for both paper and digital records, procedures for the migration of digital records with archival value and by Operational Selection Policies (OSPs) based on policy principles.Faulder 2016, 139While appraisal criteria are typically found in records schedules or collecting policies, some archives may draft a separate appraisal policy to guide archivists’ conversations with creators and donors and to support selection decisions. As with paper or analog archives, appraisal may happen prior to accessioning archival materials, at the time of accession, during processing (or ingest), and again at some later date, should reappraisal be necessary. For digital content, well-defined appraisal criteria—especially with regard to technical factors—can inform and justify selection decisions, identify specific preservation issues, ensure resources and staff time are used judiciously, and mitigate risks posed by accepting formats that are not supported by appropriate resources or preservation strategies.Faulder 2016, 140For example, if a Web browser’s cache is included in a forensic disk image created during the accessioning of a donor’s hard drive, the appraisal policy can help guide ethical judgments and collection decisions regarding those records and how such decisions are conveyed to key stakeholders. The policy could thus not only ensure transparency with producers but also mitigate potential risks before the transfer occurs.Royal Armouries 2017, 2The aims of this policy are: ¶ to ensure that the Museum’s appraisal strategy selects archives of the highest archival value. ¶ to assess the significance of collections, series and items, and to develop a rational and consistent appraisal methodology. ¶ to encourage rational and consistent appraisal decisions, valid over time, for all records of potential archival value created by or on behalf of the Royal Armouries, or produced by other individuals and organisations whose collections are held at the Royal Armouries, and to document these decisions. ¶ to ensure accountability for appraisal decisions. ¶ to ensure the appropriate destruction of duplicate material and ephemera and to destroy all other unwanted material confidentially, if not wanted by the vendor or depositor. Material will occasionally be offered to other archive services or Places of Deposit.Pendergrass et al. 2019, 184Finally, selective appraisal policies and practices should include regular reappraisal. Initial appraisal decisions do not always stand the test of time, and, given the continual cost—environmental and otherwise—of preserving digital content, reappraisal should be standard practice.Martzahl 2020, 184Chapter 3, “Deaccessioning in Hybrid Archives and Museum Collections at the University of Florida,” details how UF staff developed an appraisal policy while managing the concerns and needs of various donors. They have maintained open and active communication with their donors, soliciting their advice and input to help determine significance of the donated objects. UF staff have also shared their policies with their donor community and are consistently and uniformly documenting their decision processes.NARA 2020This policy sets out the strategic framework, objectives, and guidelines that the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) uses to determine whether Federal records have archival value. It also provides more specific guidelines for appraising certain categories of records.
