Processing workflow overview

The following activities are conducted by the Center’s processing staff, as well as their interns, under the direction of the Collections Services Archivist.

1. Collection assembled for processing. Processors should consult the Center’s control files, Aspace, Alma (as some holdings may be suppressed and not visible in HOLLIS), and the manuscript strays aisles.
2. Barcodes for boxes pulled from HD (items should be deleted from Alma) 
3. If processing a collection with a GA or MC collection number, please request new collection number from Collections Services Archivist.
4. Create folder(s) for collection in
1. N:\Collections\01_Archives  or
2. N:\Collections\03_Manuscripts
5. Create collection level record created in Metrics Database. 
6. Conduct pre-processing review of collection and create processing plan for the collection, if one has not already been prepared. The processing plan should be submitted to the Collections Services Archivist for review prior to implementation.
7. Initial research conducted on creator to inform processing.                                                             
8. Collection physically grouped into series and refoldered. Preliminary inventory in Excel created using the Center’s listing template. (Depending on collection and processing plan, processors may prefer to list collection and then handle arrangement.)        
9. Preservation measures applied selectively (sleeving, copying to acid free paper, removing fasteners, etc.). The Center does not routinely remove paperclips or fasteners, copy newspaper clipping to acid free paper, remove sticky notes, or separate photographs from folders. 
10. Arrangement of collection fixed; folders are numbered and spreadsheets updated for export.
11. Biographical note, scope and content note for collection, and series descriptions prepared.
12. Description and folder lists copied to Center’s encoding template; additional descriptive activities conducted, including performing subject analysis for collection and creating notes related how collection was processed.
13. Processor obtains med finding aid number from Collections Services Archivist.
14. Draft finding aid submitted to CS team colleague for peer review; feedback implemented. 
15. Draft finding aid submitted to Collections Services Archivist for review. Processor makes revisions per discussion of comments with the CSA.
16. CSA uploads finding aid to ArchivesSpace.
17. Processor updates bibliographic record in Alma (including holdings record and item records) and notifies Collections Services Archivist when record is complete.
18. Processor creates EAC-CPF record.
19. CSA edits bibliographic record and adds link to finding aid and updates list of web-accessible finding aids on Center’s website.
20. Processor writes blog post related to opening of collection; scanning related images as appropriate using Center’s scanning specifications and scanning log.
21. If collection creator has a Wikipedia record, processor adds link to finding aid.
22. Processor updates MD records for collection (daily activities and collection-level) and control files.
23. Collection sent off-site to HD.
24. Any biographical information weeded from the collection can be used to create a biographical file for the creator if one doesn’t exist or can be added to an existing biographical file.                            

Identify the collection type

Archival:  Generally used to describe inactive Harvard Medical School, Harvard School of Public Health, and Harvard Dental School records of enduring historical value. 

 Example: Harvard School of Public Health. Office of the Dean. Records of the Office of the Dean, 1961-1985 (inclusive). P-DE01, Series 00139. 

Papers:  Designates a body of documents accumulated naturally by a person or family. 

 Example: Avery,  Mary Ellen, 1927-. Mary Ellen Avery Papers, 1929-2002 (inclusive)  H MS c201.

Records:  Used for the records of a non-Harvard organization or institution. 

Example: Free Hospital for Women. Records, 1875-1975.BWH c6. 

Artificial:  Encompasses materials acquired from various sources brought together by the holding repository. 

 Example: Waterhouse family. Waterhouse family papers, 1780-1871 (inclusive), 1811-1818 (bulk). H MS c17.

Collection:  Encompasses materials collected by a particular individual, family, or corporate entity.       

 Example: Fein, Rashi. Collected video recordings, 1970, 1999.

Conduct preliminary research

Conducting research in advance of processing and becoming familiar with a collection is essential to maintaining collection integrity and creating a good access tool.

• Consult documentation in the Center’s control file for the collection. Control files are in the cabinets outside of the Head, Collections Services' office and contain information on the donor (including any special instructions from the donor), accessioning and processing, and description. Many control file folders are empty. It is not unusual to find one or all of the control files for a collection empty.  

• Some collections may require subject background readings in order to understand the terminology used and to place the collection within the historical context of a specific field. However, processors are respectfully asked to limit the amount of time they devote to background reading and research. The Center does not expect staff subject expertise as a product of processing.

• Become familiar with the activities of the individual/organization represented in the papers/records in order to provide context for the arrangement and description of the collection. See the following resources for biographical information:
  • Who Was Who in America (E747.W42)
  • Dictionary of American Biography (E176 .D56)
  • American National Biography (Ref. 11 CT 213 .a512 1999)
  • United States Deceased Physician File (AMA), 1864-1968 (requires free FamilySearch account)
    
• HOLLIS for related Harvard collections and biographical notes.
• The Center’s biographical files.
• PubMed. Searches in PubMed will often point to obituaries, memorials, profiles, etc. 
• WorldCat. For non-Harvard collections.
• Online biographical resources available through HOLLIS, and print resources, such as:
• Perform a general Google search on the individual. 
• Consult card catalog in Reading Room for item-level cards.
• Consult the Public Services Librarian and Reference Archivist if locating basic biographical information is difficult.

Survey boxes & formulate series

Locating all of the "puzzle pieces"

On-site

Locations in the stacks are indicated in the Stacks Temporary Use Spreadsheet and HMSdb4 in this format: Row/Column/Shelf (ex 1/F/6). For specific call no. locations, consult the stacks map on the wall just inside the main entrance to the closed stacks or ask a member of the Public Services Staff.

Always be sure to check the manuscript strays (“A-Z”) aisles for pieces of a collection that were separated from the bulk of the collection.

Off-site

Barcodes for boxes stored off-site can be obtained from the item records in Alma attached to the bibliographic record for the collection. The processor should make a list of the barcodes of boxes he or she wants pulled from HD and save it as a .txt file (such as in Notepad).

When the list is ready, go to the Harvard Depository Media Retrieval Request Form and submit the request. Always forward the list of barcodes requested to the Center’s HD point-person for inclusion in the Center’s overall HD statistics.

Once recalled, remove barcodes from boxes, delete the barcodes from Alma, update the holdings record from “HDRB” to “RAREB,” and withdraw the items from HD. Those with HD privileges can recall boxes from HD and withdraw barcodes. Whenever boxes are recalled or barcodes deleted, send the barcode numbers to the HD point-person. See HD point-person for any questions. 

Born-digital, audiovisual, and web archives

Check the following places, to make sure you have accounted for all born-digital, audiovisual, and web archives in the collection. For FY25 and later accessions, these formats will be added to the accession record in ArchivesSpace if they are present. For FY21and later, these formats will be noted on the accession form; accession forms can be find in the physical and/or electronic control files. You may also consult the A/V log [N:\Collections\07_Collections_Databases_and_Lists\AV Tracking] and the E-Media Tracking Spreadsheet [N:\Collections\07_Collections_Databases_and_Lists\Electronic Records and Digital Collections].

Conducting your survey

Surveying the materials is a prerequisite of preparing or revising a processing plan. The survey will provide the processor with a general overview of the collection; it is not meant to be a comprehensive examination of the collection. As such, avoid spending too much time focusing on individual items. When conducting a survey, be sure to make notes on the following items for later consultation when writing the processing plan:

• Current box-level arrangement:
• Is it purposeful arrangement?
• Do folder titles and folder contents sync?
• Are date ranges on folders accurate?
• Are there obvious groupings of records?
• Are there obvious gaps or missing records?
• Is it obvious that someone other than the creator took a previous pass at the collection?
• Description of contents:
• What functions do the records illustrate?
• What are major subject areas covered?
• Likely series arrangement, the level of processing for each series and anticipated need for rearrangement.
• Current physical condition of collection:
• Are there any immediate preservation needs?
• What non-textual formats are in the collection?
• Will special housing requirements be necessary, such as oversize boxes or lantern slide boxes?
• Will the collection require a large volume of, or special, archival supplies?
• Are there restricted records in the collection?
• The likely workflow and time necessary to complete processing
• Approximate date range for the collection
• Provenance
• Frequent or prominent correspondents
• Occupations and occupational activities
• Well-documented geographical locations
• Languages other than English
• Possible discards (do not discard anything at this stage)

Do not rearrange any part of the collection at this point in the process. Keep records in the order in which they were received. Be sure all accessions and separated records have been identified.

Formulation of Series

Series constitute the principal intellectual "groupings" of archival processing around which the collection is sorted, arranged, and described. Many series contain a variety of related papers that are then grouped under subseries.

Series should only be established when there is a sufficient quantity of material present to make a series a meaningful gathering point. The Center does not “artificially” create series by removing certain types of records from other records. For example, photographs are not pulled from folders to create a photograph series.

Record groups, series, and subseries should be developed with the following in mind:

• Areas of activity and function
• Professional records/Personal papers distinction
• Material type

A note on subseries:

Subseries may or may not exist in a series, but if they exist, all material in the series should be brought under some form of subseries control. That is, if part of a series is to be identified as a subseries, whatever else is in the series must also be subordinated to a subseries. In other words, a series cannot have just one subseries.

Below are some commonly encountered series for use within the context of the creator’s role as a member of the Harvard community or otherwise.

Administrative Records

Determine the complexity level

Complexity is based on the perceived amount of time needed to evaluate, intellectually and physically arrange, and describe a collection. Rankings are assigned at the onset of processing, not at the conclusion of a project. For this reason, it is a required element of the processing plan. If the original “complexity” assessment ends up being inaccurate, record the reason for the revised assessment in the collection-level MD tracking record.

Rankings are as follows:

1. No rearrangement necessary. Processed as-is.
2. Some rearrangement required, but of the "minor housekeeping" variety. (Some folders need to be moved to different boxes, etc.).
3. Rearrangement necessary to restore (perceived) original order, but series are identifiable/recognizable. 
4. Rearrangement necessary, but series are hard to determine "up front," requiring periodic re-evaluation of processing plan as records are handled. 
5. Full archivist-imposed organization necessary. Records are not in any discernible order or groupings, requiring file-by-file or item-by-item handling and grouping. 

A very large collection may receive a 2 because it requires only a small amount of physical rearrangement, and a very small collection may be a 4 or 5, if papers have been dumped into boxes and are a big mess.

Determine the processing level

The following processing levels are based on the levels established by the Harvard community as part of the MASC/MACO survey in 2009 with some minor local modifications. 

Create the processing plan

For each collection, the processor will create either two or three versions of the processing plan. These versions will provide the Center and future staff with a before-and-after understanding of planning and processing decisions. The purpose of these documents is to help with processing planning and for our own departmental documentation.

If you, as the processor, are developing the processing plan and implementing it, there will be two versions: the original version of the plan (as processing was proposed) and a revised version that captures all subsequent changes made to the plan as processing progressed and was completed (Revision 1). Save revisions in the collection’s “Workflow” with names formatted like so:

• ProcessingWorkplan_Langmuir2009 (your original plan)
• ProcessingWorkplan_Langmuir2009_rev1 (for all subsequent revisions)

If a processing plan already existed, there will be three versions. The first version is the original plan.  After the collection review, update the plan to reflect revised assessments or changes in approach as Revision 1 and submit to the Head, Collections Services for review. Save a copy illustrating all subsequent changes to the plan once processing starts as Revision 2. Save revisions in the collection’s “Workflow” with names formatted like so:

• ProcessingWorkplan_Langmuir2009 (plan not created by the processing archivist)
• ProcessingWorkplan_Langmuir2009_rev1 (for your revision of the proposed plan)
• ProcessingWorkplan_Langmuir2009_rev2 (for all subsequent revisions)

 Step-by-step

N:\Administration_CHoM\Policies_and_Policy_Development\PROCESSING MANUAL\ManualFiles_Current

• Collection Content Summary
• Begin filling out the plan template, starting with information from the collection stub record in Aspace and HOLLIS. In the stub record, there should be the collection name, number, size, and summary description of contents. If this is a collection with a GA or MC number, the processor will need the Head, Collections Services to assign the collection an H MS (Harvard Medical Library) or B MS (Boston Medical Library) collection number.
• Current Arrangement
• Note any discernable arrangement schemes for groups of records, such as files ordered chronologically, alphabetically, by project or publication name, etc. 
• Current Description (if relevant)
• Indicate whether there is a bibliographic record in HOLLIS and if any descriptive work already exists for the collection, such as a box list.
• Current Condition of Collection and Preservation Concerns
• Note an overall impression of the condition of the collection and possible preservation issues relevant now or in the near future.
• Proposed Arrangement (Series and Levels of Processing) and
• Series Summaries, Possible Restrictions, and Proposed Preservation Activities
• Provide a preliminary outline of anticipated organization for the collection and the level of processing for each series. Begin reviewing the collection to determine the initial series arrangement (some series information may also be listed in the stub record). List each series under the “Series Summaries” section of the processing plan, and for each describe the contents, proposed arrangement, and preservation activities, as well as any anticipated restrictions. Remember that this is all an initial assessment, which is subject to change during processing.
• If an item is missing from the collection that was noted as being there in an earlier inventory, note the missing item in the finding aid in the most appropriate series description.
• The research records taxonomy may be of assistance in determining series names.

Notes on Possible Arrangements

• Chronological: Series arranged chronologically begin with the earliest date in the series to the most recent. Folders with no date (“undated”) follow at the end of the chronological arrangement. Folders with only a year (i.e. 1965) will come at the beginning of the arrangement for that year, with dates that include months (June 1965) following after. Whenever two or more folders share a date (including undated), the folders should be arranged alphabetically by the folder title.
• Alphabetical: Series that follow alphabetical arrangement begin with folder titles beginning with “A”, disregarding non-filing characters such as “the.” When two or more folders share the same title, the folders should then be arranged chronologically. 

Proposed Workflow

Next, write out a proposed workflow for processing the collection. A sample action list is provided on the template form.

Get approval before you continue processing

Once the first revision of the processing plan is completed, arrange to meet with the Collection Services Archivist to review the plan. Once it has been approved, save this file and make no further edits.

Complete Revision 2 during processing/after processing is completed

Save another copy of Revision 1 of the processing plan, with the new file name. Update this version of the plan as processing proceeds, noting any changes to the initial proposals and updating collection and series descriptions to match the final scope/content notes in the finding aid. 

Revision 2 should document how the collection was ultimately processed, including decisions made and any changes to the initial plan laid out in Revision 1. While Revision 1 should be in future tense (“correspondence will be arranged chronologically”), Revision 2 should be in past tense (“in order to save time and still provide adequate access to the materials, I decided to leave correspondence in it’s original alphabetical arrangement.”)