Conservation DistList Archives [Date] [Subject] [Author] [SEARCH]

Subject: Funding of preservation

Funding of preservation

From: Erich Kesse <erikess>
Date: Tuesday, October 23, 1990
    QUERY
    HOW ARE OTHER INSTITUTIONS FUNDED?

For what types of service? The ARL Preservation Statistics have not been
sufficient to answer my questions.

At the University of Florida Libraries (UFL), preservation is funded
according to state funding formula based on serials acquisition.  We
receive funding sufficient for commercial binding of current serials. No
other funds are available for preservation.  As preservation has grown
at the UFL, these funds have been committed to monograph binding,
commercial conservation and reproduction (i.e., preservation photocopy
and microfilming), as well as serials binding.  Funding is at 7% of
Library Materials Budget (i.e., "Book Budget").  This figure appears to
be above the average, and has meant the "subversion" of the formula,
that is, funds intended for book purchase have been diverted to
preservation.  Nearly 96% of the continuing budget went to commercial
binding.

    QUERY
    HAVE ANY INSTITUTIONS DEFERRED MONOGRAPH BINDING?

The following is the text of a proposal and supporting documentation
that the UFL institute such a practice. It, no doubt, will seem
sacrilegious.  My problem is that I have not enough funds to support
preservation, and little chance of improving resources to the level
needed.  I have to achieve some kind of workable and yet philosophically
agreeable balance between initial preservation (i.e., binding),
maintenance (i.e., conservation) and holy transfiguration (i.e.,
reproduction). Grant funds are supporting some reproduction, but not
nearly enough.  Grant funds within current NEH guidelines tend to
support "great collections".  The UFL has a limited supply of such
collections and an overwhelming need, especially in collections which
are not comprehensive enough to be great.

    QUERY:
    DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE SIMILAR DOCUMENTATION WHICH WOULD EITHER
    CONFIRM OR CONTRADICT UFL DOCUMENTATION?

I hesitate to make any decision based upon one survey, even a survey as
large as that from which following documentation was compiled.

There's a bag of venomous snakes!

    SELECTION CRITERIA FOR MONOGRAPH BINDING DEFERMENT.

    RATIONALE:

    *   The Physical Condition Survey of 1989-1990 has indicated that as
        much as 75% of soft-cover/paperback acquisitions suffer little
        or no damage, either to their case (i.e., covers and spine
        covering) or text-block, as a result of use and circulation.

    *   Increases in purchase of paperbacks, either by preference or
        sole availability, combined with budgetary forces compel the
        Preservation Office to defer binding monographs until they
        suffer damage (cf, Preservation Office "Criteria for Selection
        of Materials for Repair.")

    *   Deferment saves the Office funds necessary to provide for
        increasing serials binding costs, an expanding preservation
        microfilming program meeting the needs of an increasingly
        embrittled collection, and contract conservation services for
        complex treatments we are unable to perform in-house, as well as
        other preservation maintenance and regeneration projects (e.g.,
        replacement and proper storage of deteriorating microform
        masters).

    ASSUMPTIONS:

    *   Properly selected unbound monographs may be deferred binding and
        survive use and circulation (i.e., text-blocks will not suffer
        loss of any sort).

    *   Deferment of binding until case treatment is necessitated is a
        form of natural selection for binding.

    *   Many materials may never become damaged and, therefore, would
        never need either repair or first commercial binding.  For a
        percentage of materials (rate unknown), commercial binding will
        at some point become necessary; an equivalent percentage of
        funds generated by deferment will be needed again for binding.

    *   Disaster will not seriously damage soft-cover materials relative
        to that incurred by hard cover materials.  This assumes
        continued "tight" shelving of materials.

    *   Modern soft-cover cases are transitory and may be damaged either
        by circulation or disaster.  They are typically removed during
        binding.

    NOTE:

    The two assumptions above "climb out" of local experience with
    disaster.  In cases of fire, damage was either complete incineration
    or smoke/chemical residue.  Smoke damage often required recasing, or
    commercial binding for paperbacks.  Because of the extremes of local
    experience, there is little knowledge of "un-noticed" heat damage,
    much less differentiation between soft and hard covered items.  In
    the case of water, we have again often experienced the extreme:
    complete saturation, requiring rebinding. The fiscal implications
    seem to be the same whether we commercial bind or not.  In case of
    mold/mildew infestation, it is local experience that, unless subject
    to extreme and prolonged moisture, soft cover materials show
    virtually no incidence of infection in comparison to hard covered
    items which appear to support mold spores (awaiting bloom).  In case
    of insect infestation, primarily roach and carpet beetle
    infestation, a major concern in Florida, paperbacks bound with
    synthetic adhesives show virtually no sign of infestation in
    comparison to hardcover materials.  This latter concern is
    "dwindling" since beginning use of acrylic coated/impregnated cloth.
    (Non-synthetic adhesives and starch coated cloths ^often pyroxylin
    cloth| have supported insect infestation.)  No difference has been
    noted with regard to infestations of silverfish, termites,
    powder-post beetles, etc. v Criteria for identification, routing and
    treatment of damaged materials operate adequately.

    SELECTION CRITERIA:

    Selection of materials for binding deferment must meet all of the
    following criteria and are subject to the following exclusionary
    notes.

    *   Monograph, issued either as a single volume or part of a
        multi-volume title, no part of which has been or will be bound;
        AND

    *   Originally issued, within soft-covers, with sewn signatures,
        side-wire stitching (i.e., staples) or oversewing; AND

    *   Has covers no less than:
        (a) uncoated papers: 15 point,
        (b) coated papers: 10 point, or
        (c) synthetic papers: 10 point.
            (Thickness may be half that required above when the cover is
            composed of folded flaps extending a minimum of two-thirds
            the width of the cover.) AND

            *   Has no less than 51 pages and no more than 600 pages; AND

            *   Does not exceed 2 in. or 5 cm. in spine width; AND

            *   Does not contain bibliographic information unique on the
                cover as outlined in binding policies for retention of
                the cover during binding.

                NOTE: If cover contains unique bibliographic information
                it will be bound according to binding policy (cf,
                Preservation Office Binding Policy G.03.00, "Retention
                of Paperback Covers, Wrappers and Jackets").

    EXCLUSIONARY NOTES:

    *   Atlases and scores, either because of their size or use, are
        excluded.

    *   Government documents, because of complete past neglect, are
        excluded.  The intent of excluding documents is to bind
        materials which are likely to deteriorate with use and
        circulation now that automated access to them has been
        established.  Exclusion allows a retrospective binding process
        to take place, protecting materials which the condition survey
        indicates will deteriorate.

    *   Items meeting criteria for selection as rare, manuscript or
        archival material as defined by the Department of Special
        Collections are excluded.

    WORKFLOW:

    *   Paperback materials placed on binding truck(s) in Catalog Dept.
        after cataloging.

    *   Binding Unit staff pick up binding truck from Catalog Dept. and
        sort materials in Preservation Office, using criteria above,
        into those which will be bound and those for which binding will
        be deferred.

    *   Materials selected for binding will be prepared for shipment to
        commercial bindery; while those selected for deferment will be
        returned to the Processing Unit in the Catalog Department for
        end processing.

        NOTE: It is expected that use of criteria will generate
        approximately 15% deferment rate, or 3875 volumes annually.

    *   Materials returned from bindery shall be handled according to
        established procedures; while deferred binding materials shall
        be handled as processed hardcover monographs.

    TABLES:

    Information compiled from 1989 Physical Condition Survey of 1865
    volumes: (following)
    Survey was designed within statistical tolerances to produce
    results at a 95% +/-5% confidence level.


    FREQUENCY BREAKDOWN: TYPE OF BOOK.
    TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS.

    TYPE OF BOOK            CASE         TEXT-BLOCK   CASE & TEXT-BLOCK
    OF                      TREATMENT    TREATMENT    TREATMENT
    BOOK           TOTAL    REQUIRED     REQUIRED     REQUIRED
                 COUNTED      #    %       #    %       #    %

    PAPERBACK       490     121  25%      56  11%      42   9%
    SOFTCOVER
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    HARDBOUND      1366     224  16%     173  13%      97   7%
    HARDCOVER
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    OTHER             9       2  22%       2  22%       2  22%


    FREQUENCY BREAKDOWN:
    TYPE OF BOOK.
    CASE TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS, CHRONOLOGICAL ANALYSIS.

    TYPE OF   TOTAL   DECADE    CASE TREATMENT REQUIRED
    BOOK      COUNT               #        %    Cum.%   Rate Increase
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    PAPER       129   1980-89     3     2.33     2.33          2.33
    COVER       107   1970-79    22    20.56    10.59          8.26
    (490)        82   1960-69    25    30.49    15.72          5.13
                 73   1950-59    28    38.36    19.95          4.23
                 41   1940-49    19    46.34    22.45          2.50
                 27   1930-39    12    44.44    23.75          1.30
                  7   1920-29     6    85.71    24.68          0.93
                  5   1910-19     1    20.00    24.63          0.00
                  1   1900-09     1   100.00    24.79          0.16
                  4   1851-99     2    50.00    25.00          0.21
                 11   no date     2    18.18    -----          ----

    TYPE OF   TOTAL   DECADE    CASE TREATMENT REQUIRED
    BOOK      COUNT               #        %    Cum.%   Rate Increase
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    HARD        279   1980-89     7     2.51     2.51          2.51
    COVER       309   1970-79    39    12.62     7.82          5.31
    (1366)      294   1960-69    52    17.69    11.11          3.29
                151   1950-59    35    23.18    12.88          1.77
                 78   1940-49    21    26.92    13.86          0.98
                 61   1930-39    15    24.59    14.42          0.56
                 56   1920-29    15    26.79    14.98          0.56
                 32   1910-19    10    31.25    15.40          0.58
                 29   1900-09    15    51.72    16.21          0.81
                 27   1851-99     9    33.33    16.57          0.36
                  4   pre1850     1    25.00    16.59          0.02
                 34   no date     7    20.59    -----          ----

    TYPE OF   TOTAL   DECADE    CASE TREATMENT REQUIRED
    BOOK      COUNT               #        %    Cum.%   Rate Increase
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    OTHER        3    1970-79     1    33.33    33.33         33.33
    (9)          1    1900-09     1   100 00    50.00         16.67


    FREQUENCY BREAKDOWN:
    TYPE OF BOOK.
    TEXT-BLOCK TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS, CHRONOLOGICAL ANALYSIS.

    TYPE OF   TOTAL   DECADE    TEXTBLOCK TREATMENT REQUIRED
    BOOK      COUNT               #        %    Cum.%   Rate Increase
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    PAPER       129   1980-89     1     0.78       0.78        0.78
    COVER       107   1970-79     5     4.67       2.54        1.78
    (490)        82   1960-69     7     8.54       4.09        1.55
                 73   1950-59    15    20.55       7.16        3.07
                 41   1940-49    10    24.39       8.80        1.64
                 27   1930-39     8    29.63      10.02        1.22
                  7   1920-29     2    28.57      10.03        0.01
                  5   1910-19     1    20.00      10.04        0.01
                  1   1900-09     1   100.00      10.59        0.55
                  4   1851-99     2    50.00      10.92        0.33
                 11   no date     2    18.18      -----        ----

    TYPE OF   TOTAL   DECADE    TEXTBLOCK TREATMENT REQUIRED
    BOOK      COUNT               #        %    Cum.%   Rate Increase
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    HARD        279   1980-89     5     1.79       1.79        1.79
    COVER       309   1970-79    18     5.83       3.91        2.12
    (1366)      294   1960-69    31    10.54       6.12        2.21
                151   1950-59    30    19.87       8.13        2.01
                 78   1940-49    15    19.23       7.11        0.00 (-1)
                 61   1930-39    15    24.59       8.02        0.91
                 56   1920-29    17    30.35       9.04        1.02
                 32   1910-19    10    31.25       9.60        0.56
                 29   1900-09    12    41.38      10.03        0.43
                 27   1851-99     9    33.33      10.79        0.76
                  4   pre1850     4   100.00      11.06        0.27
                 34   no date     6    17.65      -----        ----

    TYPE OF   TOTAL   DECADE    TEXTBLOCK TREATMENT REQUIRED
    BOOK      COUNT               #        %    Cum.%   Rate Increase
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    OTHER        3    1970-79     1    33.33      33.33       33.33
    (9)          1    1900-09     1   100.00      50.00       16.67


    FREQUENCY BREAKDOWN:
    TYPE OF BOOK.
    CASE AND TEXT-BLOCK TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS, CHRONOLOGICAL ANALYSIS.

    TYPE OF   TOTAL   DECADE    CASE & TEXTBLOCK
    BOOK      COUNT               #        %     Cum.%    Rate Increase
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    PAPER       129   1980-89     0     0.00      0.00         0.00
    COVER       107   1970-79     4     3.74      1.70         1.70
    (490)        82   1960-69     5     6.10      2.83         1.13
                 73   1950-59    13    18.31      5.63         2.80
                 41   1940-49     7    17.07      6.71         1.08
                 27   1930-39     5    18.52      7.41         0.70
                  7   1920-29     2    28.57      7.73         0.32
                  5   1910-19     0     0.00      7.64         0.00
                  1   1900-09     1   100.00      7.84         0.20
                  4   1851-99     2    50.00      8.19         0.35
                 11   no date     1     9.09     -----         ----

    TYPE OF   TOTAL   DECADE    CASE & TEXTBLOCK
    BOOK      COUNT               #        %     Cum.%    Rate Increase
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    HARD        279   1980-89     1     0.36      0.36         0.36
    COVER       309   1970-79     8     2.59      1.53         1.17
    (1366)      294   1960-69    19     6.46      3.18         1.65
                151   1950-59    17    11.26      4.36         1.18
                 78   1940-49    11    14.10      5.04         0.68
                 61   1930-39     7    11.48      5.38         0.34
                 56   1920-29    11    19.64      6.03         0.65
                 32   1910-19     6    18.75      6.35         0.32
                 29   1900-09     8    27.59      6.83         0.48
                 27   1851-99     1     3.70      6.76         0.00
                  4   pre1850     1    25.00      6.82         0.06
                 34   no date     2     5.88     -----         ----

    TYPE OF   TOTAL   DECADE    CASE & TEXTBLOCK
    BOOK      COUNT               #        %     Cum.%    Rate Increase
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    OTHER         3   1970-79     1    33.33     33.33        33.33
    (9)           1   1900-09     1   100.00     50.00        16.67


    ASSUMPTIONS, COMMENTS, ANALYSES, ETC.

    *   Case damage could be said to bear relation to durability of
        covering material, i.e., paper vs. board, as well as age, type
        and quantity of adhesive(s), method of leaf attachment, and
        method of case attachment.

    *   Case damage to hardbound/hardcover materials usually occurs in
        publisher's bindings. (?)

    *   Text-block damage could be said to bear some relation to
        durability of covering material, but must also be thought to
        bear relation to durability of text-block materials,
        particularly embrittlement, and the method of leaf attachment.

    *   These tables make no direct connections between type of book and
        either covering material or embrittlement of text-block papers.

    *   Paperback/softcover materials tend to suffer more damage than
        hardbound/hardcover materials in all categories.

    *   In terms of quantity of necessary treatments, hardbound/
        hardcover materials represent a larger need.  However, in terms
        of their number in the collections, paperbacks/softcovers have a
        more pressing need.

    *   Treatments of hardbound materials usually involve conservation,
        though they may also require commercial recasing or rebinding.

    *   Treatments of paperback materials usually involve commercial
        binding.

    *   Insufficient information was gathered with regard to "other"
        types of item.

    *   If items were identified at the point of damage to the case, and
        repaired, then the majority of items apparently would not suffer
        text-block damage.  (Note: a proper overlap study has not yet
        been conducted, but the numbers suggest that this statement is
        generally true.)

    *   Data indicates that as much as 75% to 89% of monographs may be
        sent to the stacks unbound without apparent risk of text-block
        damage.

    *   Rate of damage increase tends to "stabilize" after 30 to 40
        years, most probably the period of greatest use and circulation.
        Other tables (not included here), however, indicate that
        embrittlement in the University of Florida Libraries (UFL)
        collections begins within and steadily increases after the first
        30 years.  Other tables (also not included here) indicate that
        while @ 19% of UFL are currently embrittled, @ 90% of all
        materials (including recent and new acquisitions) contain ground
        wood pulp, show presence of alum rosin sizing, and have pH less
        than 7.0 -- factors contributing to future embrittlement.
        Studies to rate increase of embrittlement have not yet been
        made; however, data compiled so far indicates a rate of increase
        at +4% (min.) per decade.  At current costs for protective
        enclosure, conservation or reproduction, treatment of volumes
        currently embrittled will cost more than eight million dollars
        (U.S.), and treatment of volumes projected to become embrittled
        will cost an additional 320,000 dollars per decade.  My current
        continuing budget is $329,000. Binding deferment appears to both
        generate a small pool of funds from which to pursue reproduction
        of embrittled materials and ensures that binding will not
        obstruct future a        reproduction in at least a small
        percentage of the collection. Rate of enclosure for soft and
        hard cover items appears to be equal.  Other factors: current
        cost of first time monograph binding is @ $5.67, serials binding
        is @ $8.61 per volume.  For monograph binding, 15% deferment
        (3875 volumes) could save as much as $21,971.25 annually; this
        assumes that binding will be deferred permanently. Higher levels
        of deferment save more. Tables indicate 15% need for case
        treatment within first 30 to 40 years, the savings could be
        nothing at a 15% deferment. However, first time binding
        deferment appears to result in a savings of funds which might
        otherwise be spent on commercial recasing (a maximum of $6006.25
        annually).

    RECOMMENDATIONS.

    *   Quality and durability of hardbound/hardcover publishers'
        bindings should be further studied.

    *   A percentage of monograph binding should be deferred. Percentage
        should be based, in large part, on physical characteristics of
        the unbound item and on rates of damage increase.

                                  ***
                  Conservation DistList Instance 4:21
                 Distributed: Tuesday, October 23, 1990
                        Message Id: cdl-4-21-006
                                  ***
Received on Tuesday, 23 October, 1990

[Search all CoOL documents]