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.
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 Project
Purpose: to Design an Archives Accreditation Scheme for the UK
Aims 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.
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
10. A Blended Solution
Archives Accreditation ‘Building Block’
STANDARDS/
REQUIREMENTS
MODULES GRADING / GUIDANCE & DELIVERY
LEVELS SUPPORT PROCESS
ASSESSMENT
11. Pre-qualification or ‘milestone’ markers
Options • for organisations on a journey towards full
accreditation
1. Same structure as revised Museum Minimum standards
Accreditation Scheme; • common to all museum and archive applicants
2. Request changes to the proposed • museums only
modules for Museum Accreditation; • archives only
3. Create additional modules; or
4. 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 Approach
1. 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. Sample
1 Organisational Health
1.3 Appropriate management arrangements
Objective: 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 below
1.3.1 The service has a satisfactory management structure from
the governing body to the user
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