[PADG:1053] collections conservation

["Yvonne A. Carignan" <yc38@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

For those of you interested in the outcome of the "Contracting for 
Collections Conservation" discussion at ALA, please find a report on it 
below:

ALA/ALCTS/PARS Discussion Group: Preservation Issues in Small to 
Mid-Sized Libraries
Sunday, July 9, 2000

Contracting Collections Conservation: 

	In this discussion, we dealt with three aspects of contracting 
for general collections preservation treatments: 

1.  	"What are the collections conservation treatments that we would 
like to outsource?" 

2.	"Who are the vendors for such treatments?  Are such treatments 
profitable?"  

3.	"What will our contracts or work statements say?"

	Discussion of the first issue, "What are the collections 
conservation treatments that we would like to outsource?" was 
facilitated by Widener Library Collections Conservator, Ethel Hellman. 
Ethel led brainstorming to list all possible preservation activities 
that anyone might want to outsource related to general collections.  On 
this list, contracted activities ranged from every kind of preservation 
treatment and training for such, to surveys, lab design, specifications 
for supplies, disaster salvage, environmental monitoring, and 
preparation for reformatting.  Thinking "outside the box," the group 
even envisioned a mobile conservation lab in a trailer that could 
travel from one institutional client to another, staying as long as 
conservation services were needed.  

	Jill Rawnsley, Preservation Services Office, Conservation 
Center for Art and Historic Artifacts (CCAHA), facilitated discussion 
of our second topic, "Who are the vendors for such treatments?  Are 
such treatments profitable?"  In leading this discussion, Jill pointed 
out that regional non-profit conservation centers have offered most of 
the services on the list, but usually for special collections rather 
than for general collections.  Models currently exist for contracted 
on-site training and as well as for repairs.  Classes on book repair 
are most popular, but of questionable effectiveness without ongoing 
oversight by a professional conservator.  

	Brian Baird, Head of Preservation at the University of Kansas, 
described an unusual situation where his institution, having the only 
conservation lab in the state, if not the region, offers contracted 
conservation treatments to other libraries and archives.  Most of those 
institutions, however, have contracted for special, rather than 
general, collections treatments.  

	Disaster salvage is another type of treatment frequently 
contracted.  Besides the obvious need to contract for large salvage and 
vacuum freeze drying projects, insurance may cover costs for contracted 
treatments, but not the cost of in-house treatments.  Moreover, one 
disaster salvage treatment, mold removal, is a service readily 
available at the regional centers, such as the Conservation Center for 
Art and Historic Artifacts. 

	To make general collections treatment affordable, vendors 
recommended that institutions contract out quicker treatments and use 
treatment procedures for documentation rather than requiring elaborate 
reports and photographs.  Such vendors as Bridgeport National Bindery 
charge by the hour rather than by types of treatments.  Ralph Ocker, 
speaking for Ocker & Trapp Library Bindery, advised clients to consider 
the staff costs required for preparing bindery slips and packing items 
for shipping.  Ocker & Trapp does, however, offer hand binding 
services. 

	To maximize efficiency and cost saving for clients, Ethel 
Hellman advised vendors to simplify their workflow and their stock of 
supplies.  For instance, vendors might limit the choices of cloths 
offered for recases and enclosures.

	Discussion of our third issue, "What will our contracts or work 
statements say?" was facilitated by Karen Sinkule, in charge of 
Microfilming Books and Serials, and Preservation of Audiovisuals, 
Preservation and Collection Management Section, National Library of 
Medicine (NLM).  Karen led the group first in identifying elements of a 
"statement of work" or contract.  These included a description of the 
work, its quantity, the range and nature of materials, procedures, 
relevant standards, turn around times and delivery schedules, insurance 
and security offsite and in transit, cost, quality control -- who 
performs it and what are the criteria for it, and the consequences of  
failure to perform.  

	Karen then facilitated a prioritization of the treatments that 
we had identified in the brainstorming session.  As its first priority, 
the group selected the general category of treatments for damaged 
collections.  Condition surveys were ranked second, and training for 
book repair was ranked as the third priority.  Then we identified work 
statement wording specifically related to each of the three priorities. 
For example, a work statement on conservation treatments should include 
description of work, material specifications, technical and performance 
specifications for each type of treatment, work requirements and work 
relationships between client and vendor, how and when to apply sets of 
specifications, requirements for a sample set or pilot project during 
the bid process, and a decision tree.  Costs may be defined by a flat 
rate for a well defined product or an hourly rate. 

	A service contract, related to surveys and training, would have 
a more general statement of work compared to the specifications of a 
treatment work statement.  Requirements for references and samples 
should be included in a service contract.

	Karen warned that to run a contract well, one must learn as 
much about the contracted activity as one would to do it oneself.  Time 
and expertise are needed to evaluate the quality of a contract 
proposal.  The client also needs to beware of vendors who underbid.  
That may well be a sign that the vendor does not understand the project 
or will inappropriately assign technicians instead of professional 
conservators to the project.  Once a vendor is selected, we were 
advised to give generous attention to quality control at the beginning 
of the project to set standards for the whole project.

	In summary, we found some answers to our three questions.  
Those present were most interested in outsourcing treatments for 
damaged collections, condition surveys, and training for book repair.  
Regarding the availability of such services, the participating vendors 
did more or less offer the services we wanted.  Conservation centers 
and commercial library binderies do offer some general collections 
conservation, and the centers also offer conservation surveys as well 
as training for in-house book repair.  Yet it became apparent that the 
profitability of collections conservation is elusive.  The work either 
has to be very routinized for an assembly line approach, or the 
customer has to trust the vendor to make the treatment decisions, or 
both.  Then there is the issue of cost effectiveness for the customer 
who can treat items for less cost in-house, but only if it is possible 
to set up an in-house lab with trained staff.  As Karen Sinkule 
testified, one can contract for anything, but it takes funding.

----------------------
Yvonne Carignan
Preservation Department Head
McKeldin Library
University of Maryland 
College Park, MD 20742
yc38@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
VoiceMail: 301-405-9343