Organisational capability – detail
Scoring
0 - Very low or no awareness
1 - Some awareness but no analysis of barriers and no planning or action
2 - Basic activity – identification of key barriers and simple plans and actions
3 - Managed activity – coherent identification of barriers and comprehensive plans and activities
4 - Optimised activity – EDIB activity fully integrated into all areas of activity and strategic behaviour with on-going review and revision
[A] Organisational Viability
Coverage
Governance, organisational structure, staffing and resourcing of EDIB activities
Prompts
• Is your organisation aware of EDIB?
• What action is it taking to bring in EDIB?
• How extensive is this organisational action?
• How well resourced is this organisational action?
• How does the wider organisation’s approach to EDIB support the archive service in EDIB matters?
Scoring
0 - The organisation has minimal awareness of the need to incorporate EDIB into its services
1 – The organisation is aware of the need to support EDIB focused activities
2 - Activities are supported and resourced at a basic level within the organisation, for example:
There is some engagement from senior management.
Staff have assigned responsibilities and capacity and support to undertake them.
A budget for EDIB activities has been allocated (may be time-limited).
Staff development requirements have been identified
3 - Activities are managed and supported within the organisation, for example:
There is commitment from senior management.
Responsibility for EDIB is clearly owned.
Staff have the skills they need to carry out EDIB related activities and access to relevant expertise where required.
A dedicated core budget for EDIB activities has been allocated.
Budgets, staff roles and development needs are regularly assessed.
Metrics and reports can be generated about the impact of EDIB activities to help inform reporting, planning and management.
Staff development requirements have been funded.
Equality, Diversity, Inclusion & Belonging activities have been identified as a strategic priority
4 - Activities are proactively managed, enhanced and developed within the organisation, for example:
Benefits of embracing EDIB activities are recognized, championed and embedded throughout the organisation.
The organisation links up EDIB activities with stakeholder groups.
One or more staff are considered to be experts in their field.
Budgets, staff roles and development needs are proactively assessed in anticipation of future changes.
Metrics and reports about EDIB focused activities are combined with projections of future needs to proactively inform reporting, planning and management.
The efficacy of staff development is regularly monitored.
Continuity and succession plans are in place to ensure ongoing commitment to EDIB focused activities, if management responsibility changes for impacted service areas
[B] Policy & Strategy
Coverage
Policies, strategies, and procedures which govern the operation and management of EDIB activities
Prompts
Having an EDIB policy is a good start but how far is the policy aligned to and embedded in daily activity across the organisation?
Can the archive service align itself with wider organisational strategy to enable EDIB?
Scoring
0 - The organisation has minimal awareness of the need for a policy framework for EDIB activities
1 - The organisation is aware of the need to develop an EDIB policy framework and may have some relevant policies, but no EDIB focused policy or strategy exists.
2 - The organisation has a basic policy framework, for example:
A high-level EDIB policy or strategy exists.
Other policies relating to EDIB may exist but there are gaps in coverage or application
Some procedures for EDIB focused activities are in place and may be documented.
Scope of collection is defined and understood (e.g.: collections development policy, retention schedule).
Development of policy and procedure is informed by a basic understanding of service user / potential user needs.
The organisation has a comprehensive & managed suite of policies, strategies & procedures e.g.
The EDIB policy/strategy is aligned with other organisational policies and is reviewed according to an agreed schedule. Policy and procedure take into account any relevant ethical issues.
A suite of documented processes and procedures exists for managing, and providing ethical access to collections
All staff are aware of EDIB priorities and relevant staff are aware of EDIB policies, strategies and procedures, applicable to their roles and responsibilities
Knowledge of current and future use informs policy and procedure (for example on collecting, conservation, access).
3 – The organisation has a comprehensive and managed suite policies, plans and procedures e.g.
The EDIB policy/strategy is aligned with other organisational policies and is reviewed according to an agreed schedule.
Policy and procedure take into account any relevant ethical issues.
A suite of documented processes and procedures for managing, and providing ethical access to archives exists.
All relevant staff are aware of EDIB policies, strategies and procedures.
Knowledge of current and future use cases for content informs policy and procedure (for example on collecting, conservation, access).
4 - The organisation proactively manages its policies, plans and procedures and has a commitment to continuous process improvement, e.g.
A full suite of policies, plans and procedures relating to EDIB activities is in place
Policy and strategy is fully implemented and staff actively engage with it.
Policy, strategy and procedure are proactively monitored and updated to reflect internal changes, changes in other policies, user needs, or other external factors.
[C] Legal Basis
Coverage
Management of legal rights and responsibilities, compliance with relevant regulation and adherence to ethical codes
Prompts
Where is your organisation situated geographically and situationally as that will govern what is applicable legislation?
Apart from the Equalities Act what other legislation will be relevant for your particular organisation and context?
Look beyond the bare legislative minimum to the approach and extent of observing legal requirements and following the spirit of the legislation as well as the written requirements e.g. does your organisation have exclusionary practices around recruitment?
How does your organisation monitor and develop its legal EDIB compliance?
Scoring
0 - The organisation has minimal awareness of either the need to manage legal rights and responsibilities or basic principles for applying them.
1 - The organisation is aware of the need to manage legal rights and responsibilities and an understanding of basic principles
2 - Basic management of legal rights and responsibilities relating to EDIB is carried out e.g.
3 - Legal rights and responsibilities relating to EDIB are managed e.g.
Information relating to legal rights and contracts can be easily located and accessed when necessary
Legal issues and risks are managed and regularly reviewed.
Roles and responsibilities for managing legal issues and risks are clearly assigned.
Expert advice can be accessed when necessary (e.g. Legal, HR, information compliance)
Actions carried out due to legal rights and responsibilities are documented.
Ethical Accessibility responsibilities are fulfilled, in line with the requirements of relevant local or national legislation
4 - Legal rights and responsibilities relating to EDIB are proactively managed e.g.
[D] Continuous Improvement
Coverage
Processes for the assessment of EDIB capabilities, the definition of goals and the monitoring of progress.
Prompts
Is your organisation complacent about EDIB or does it recognise where it needs to take action?
How is the approach to EDIB growing and developing in your organisation?
Is improvement left to interested individuals or is it driven by corporate strategy and decisions?
How is continuous improvement enabled e.g. applying this SAT on a regular basis?
Scoring
0 - The organisation has minimal awareness of current position or goals.
1 - The organisation is aware of the need to understand current position and define goals.
2 - The organisation has a basic understanding of current EDIB capabilities & areas for improvement:
An initial benchmarking exercise has been carried out.
Gaps in EDIB capability have been identified.
There is an understanding of where the organisation is relative to peers
3 - The organisation has a managed process for benchmarking and establishing goals e.g.
Goals have been established and agreed with senior managers.
Roadmap is in place to reach goals.
Benchmarking exercise is repeated periodically.
4 - The organisation undertakes continuous process improvement, with proactive management e.g.
Certification/external review has been achieved and is maintained as appropriate e.g. Archive Service Accreditation, external stakeholder consultation
Recommendations for improvement have been acted upon
Outcomes of reviews are communicated to key stakeholders
Goals and roadmap are reviewed periodically
Improvement is viewed as a long-term process with on-going planning, evaluation and development
[E] Leading and Directing Change for EDIB
Coverage
Processes for ensuring that EDIB practice is incorporated within all elements of archive practice and the organisation
Prompts
Who identifies the need for change regarding EDIB matters?
Who ensures that change is implemented?
How does the organisation approach change?
How far does the organisation recognise the need for and support change e.g. policies and practices around changing cataloguing terminology?
How far can an individual in the organisation identify needs and implement change around EDIB and how far are they supported by the organisation to do so by recognising, accepting and enabling/resourcing the necessary change?
Scoring
0 – The organisation has minimal awareness of the need to lead and direct change
1 - The organisation is aware of the need to lead and direct change
2 - The organisation has a basic understanding of the need to lead and direct change e.g.
Barriers to EDIB in archives are identified [See [I] below]
Ad hoc activities are undertaken to address barriers e.g. approach potential donors for community records
Ad hoc community engagement activities are undertaken
Internal advocacy for EDIB within the organisation is undertaken
3 - The organisation has comprehensive processes, embedding EDIB within all elements of archive practice e.g.
Accurately identify target communities, whose protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 overtly or subtly result in their marginalisation from archives [see [I] below]
Identify inclusive practice which can engage such communities, develop policies and procedures to facilitate this [see [G] above]
Prioritise activities for EDIB with resource requirements, within a framework of developing the whole organisation
Effective staff induction, development and support, to ensure EDIB objectives are achieved
4 – The organisation proactively leads and directs change for EDIB e.g.
Partnerships are developed and maintained with internal and external stakeholders, to underpin EDIB for the organisation
Partnerships are developed and maintained with identified diverse communities, to underpin the organisation’s commitment to EDIB
A culture of open discussion on EDIB matters within a safe environment, so that all aspects can be respectfully examined, leading to an EDIB positive outlook at all levels of the organisation
Sharing knowledge and experience with other archive organisations to support their EDIB development
Advocating to current and potential stakeholders about the importance of developing good EDIB practice within archive organisations
[F] Stakeholder engagement
Coverage
The experience for stakeholders (current and potential), who are not users or staff (who are covered by other capabilities), when engaging with the organisation by any means
Prompts
Does the organisation only link with the same groups of people and types of representatives of those people?
Is the organisation aware that there are potential stakeholders it is not reaching out to and the wide range of potential stakeholders?
Does the organisation strive to exchange with the widest range of stakeholders including over time and distance?
Is the organisation open to engaging with different categories of representatives of those stakeholders or does it always refer back to the same representatives e.g. a leader of a particular community action group may be seen as the appropriate channel to work with to the exclusion of other voices within the community?
Does the organisation have the capability to engage with diverse stakeholders and expand its stakeholders?
If not how is it addressing this issue?
Scoring
0 - The organisation has minimal awareness of the differing needs and aspirations of diverse stakeholders
1 – The organisation is aware of the need to support different needs and aspirations of a range of diverse stakeholders, both current and potential
2 - Undertaking a small number of ad hoc actions to engage a narrow range of different stakeholders through existing routes of engagement. For example:
3 – Development of engagement with diverse range of stakeholders is managed and supported e.g.
Analysis to identify imbalances in particular stakeholder types e.g. depositors, trustees
Development of goals and workplans for diversifying stakeholders e.g. recruitment drive for trustees
Senior management support for stakeholder development e.g. attending key meetings, advocating at leadership level, developing appropriate policies, providing resource
4 - The organisation undertakes continuous process improvement, with proactive management to develop the diversity of stakeholders
[G] Community of Practice
Coverage
Engagement with and contribution to the wider community of practice concerning EDIB. A community of practice is where people come together to shares ideas and experiences about a particular theme. Such communities could be external (e.g. the Archives and Records Association’s Diversity Allies, the Disability Collaborative Network, Curating for Change) or internal (e.g. diversity working groups, EDI forums).
Prompts
Does the organisation share and facilitate sharing around good EDIB practice?
Does it take a role in the development, enhancement and sharing of good and best practice? E.g. committed to paying staff attendance charge and releasing staff to attend EDIB training
Where else could the organisation support that engagement?
Is your organisation linking in to other organisations that can support work on developing EDIB practice?
Scoring
0 - The organisation has minimal awareness of the need to engage with the wider EDIB community of practice
1 - The organisation is aware of the benefits of collaboration with the wider community of practice
2 - The organisation engages with the wider community of practice at a basic level e.g.
Network/s of relevant contacts have been established
Relevant community events can be accessed.
There is commitment to learn from the experiences of others.
3 - Engagement with the wider community of practice is supported and managed e.g.
Relevant networks and communities have been joined.
An active role is taken in relevant EDIB communities of practice
Expert advice can be accessed as appropriate.
Successes and lessons learned from own work is shared with the community
4 - The organisation takes a leadership role in the EDIB community of practice and proactively manages these engagements e.g.
A proactive role is taken in establishing or organizing community networks, collaborative activities or events
Contributions are made to expert groups, specialist subject networks, committees or task forces.
Service Capability – Detail
Scoring
0 - Very low or no awareness
1 - Some awareness but no analysis of barriers and no planning or action
2. - Basic activity – identification of key barriers and simple plans and actions
3. - Managed activity – coherent identification of barriers and comprehensive plans and activities
4. - Optimised activity – EDIB activity fully integrated into all areas of activity and strategic behaviour with on-going review and revision
[H] Recruitment, Selection & Retention
Coverage
Processes to attract and retain diverse applicants for both paid and volunteer posts
Prompts
At the organisational level on HR policies and procedures to be compliant with Equalities Act. But this capability is where the service actually engages with the process of recruitment.
Does your service purely comply with what the Equalities Act requires or is it adventurous e.g. putting adverts in new places, engaging with community representatives to understand why they do not apply to the archive sector?
Does the service take action to overcome identified issues around staffing?
Can individuals take action to build EDIB into recruitment, selection and retention of staff?
What is the steer from the parent organisation ?
Is the parent organisation’s HR dept receptive and responsive to forward thinking by the service or does it hinder different approaches?
Scoring
0 - The organisation has minimal awareness of the need to attract and retain diverse applicants, and the basic steps to achieve this.
1 - The organisation is aware of the need to attract and retain diverse applicants, and has a basic understanding of the steps to achieve this
2 – The organisation has implemented a basic process to attract and retain diverse applicants e.g.
Advertising and Application form text is inclusive
Advert placement takes account of non-traditional sources of recruitment
Induction and Exit interviews capture both practical details but also aspirations for employment with and actual experience of working with the organisation
3 – The organisation has implemented a coherent and managed process to attract and retain diverse applicants e.g.
Criteria for job descriptions and person specifications accurately match the requirements of the post offered, with a focus on essential, not desirable criteria
Existing patterns of recruitment (the ‘recruitment pipeline’ are identified and understood, to inform how this ‘pipeline’ can be extended to potential new community recruitment pools
Proactive engagement with advocates for target communities, to ensure direct placement of advertising for all archive sector posts, both professional and para-professional
Integrated staffing approach between professional and para-professional roles, enabling mentoring and informal career support within teams
Non-traditional routes into the sector e.g. Archive Trainee posts, supporting para-professional study through distance learning; supporting the archive & records management apprenticeship; secondments
Non-traditional recruitment approaches e.g. targeted workshops in community settings
4 – The organisation proactively manages and improves the recruitment, selection and retention processes e.g.
Coordinates with advocates of marginalised communities, to ensure that career opportunities are widely understood and communicated within communities
Advertising text and imagery, application forms, job descriptions, person specifications etc are regularly reviewed and adapted, to ensure that they remain as effective as possible
Metrics are regularly collected and reviewed, to ensure that organisational performance on EDIB is understood and to guide future recruitment, selection and retention activities
[I] Knowledge and Understanding of EDIB within Archives
Coverage
Processes to educate existing staff to identify and build confidence in addressing exclusionary practice, ethical access, offensive / inaccurate language in collections, catalogues and finding aids.
Prompts
Does the service understand EDIB (quite apart from the understanding of the wider organisation considered in the Organisational capabilities)?
Individual staff members may identify issues and solutions but is that work embraced by the archive service as a whole and built into the service rules and processes?
Is the service thinking about contemporary collecting and ready to deal with issues around this such as conservation and curation?
Is the service’s engagement and outreach work paying attention to the full diversity of possible audiences or does it stick with its usual contacts?
Does the service recognise what exclusionary practice looks like?
Does the service have the means in place to identify and eradicate exclusionary practice?
Does the service as a whole have the capacity to make change or is it just the efforts of one person?
Are directions from the partner organisation about developing EDIB embraced by the service?
Do the methods and attitude of the senior management of the service enable the service to embrace inclusive practice across its activities?
Scoring
0 - The organisation has minimal awareness of the need to educate staff and build their confidence
1 - The organisation is aware of the need to educate staff and build their confidence
2 - The organisation has a basic understanding of the need for and the content that staff education on EDIB for archives consists of. It also understands the need to build staff confidence in this regard.
Topics including exclusionary practice, ethical access, offensive / inaccurate language in collections, catalogues and finding aids are discussed in team meetings
Policies and procedures are developed, with input from team members and community advisers
There is cultural sensitivity with regard to service provision, language used etc.
3 – The organisation has a coherent and managed suite of policies, plans and procedures e.g.
Ethical Access
Offensive Language – in records, in legacy finding aids, new accessions
Inclusive cataloguing
Contemporary Collecting
Engagement and outreach work
4 – The organisation undertakes continuous improvement, with proactive management assessment:
The contents of each of these policies, strategies, procedures and their relationship to each other within the EDIB framework, is integral to the archive operating model
Regular liaison between management, staff and community advocates ensures that polices etc and how they are implemented remains current, effective and sensitive to evolving and emerging community needs
[J] Inclusive collections information
Coverage
Processes for inclusive cataloguing to address inaccurate, exclusionary or offensive language (including ‘visual language’ i.e. the use of imagery to communicate ideas) and support wider engagement with collections. This includes catalogues and other finding aids and all collection types, including visual collections.
Prompts
Does collection information contain archaic, offensive, misleading content?
Does the service recognise that this is an issue?
Does the service encourage work to address the content?
Is the service’s approach to change ad hoc or is there a developed programme with proactive follow-up?
Is there the resource to identify legacy issues?
Is change sufficiently resourced?
What about offensive imagery such as offensive stereotypes?
Do catalogues and collection containers for all types of collections include amendments to content references and explanatory/ warning notes?
Is this practice incorporated into office procedures?
Scoring
0 – The organisation has minimal awareness of the need to tackle inaccurate, exclusionary or offensive language
1 - The organisation is aware of the need to tackle inaccurate, exclusionary or offensive language
2 - The organisation has a basic understanding of how to tackle inaccurate, exclusionary or offensive language e.g.
Identify barriers to engagement, pertaining to the specific archive organisation
Formulate responses to barriers e.g. offensive or unhelpful finding aids; identify existing collections which can be re-presented to new communities, undertake contemporary collecting [see [K] below]
3 – The organisation has a systematic approach to tackling inaccurate, exclusionary or offensive language is adopted e.g.
a comprehensive and managed suite policies, plans and procedures [see [G] above]
Accurately identify marginalised communities to develop & maintain partnerships [see [H]
4 – The organisation proactively tackles inaccurate, exclusionary or offensive language through its policies, procedures and partnerships
Policies and procedures are regularly reviewed, with staff, stakeholder and partnership input and with reference to the latest professional advice and recommendations
Takes a sector wide perspective, contributes to and leads initiatives to tackle barriers to engaging with archives
[K] New Collections – Acquisition of items reflecting / of interest to diverse communities
Coverage
Processes for ensuring EDIB issues are incorporated in collections policies and appraisal criteria
Prompts
Does your service wait for people to bring in material that represents the diversity of its community or is it proactive in its collecting approach?
Does the service embrace contemporary collecting with all the challenges that brings?
Does the service have the necessary resources to enable proactive contacts, advocacy and partnership building with communities so new collections can be attracted?
Does the service have robust appraisal guidelines that are nuanced to avoid prioritization of traditional records over informal record keeping, which are just as reflective of the governance, interests and activities?
How does collecting link into the service’s outreach and engagement activities?
Is there an appetite within the service for using contemporary collections?
Within limited resources what is the service doing well to achieve what it can?
Scoring
0 – The organisation has minimal awareness of the importance of acquiring collections relevant to diverse communities
1 – The organisation is aware of the importance of acquiring collections relevant to diverse communities
2 – The organisation has a basic understanding of contemporary collecting e.g.
Has included a general statement in the collections policy
Ad hoc additions, through donation, deposit or purchase
Ad hoc engagement with community representatives, for advice and suggestions
3 – The organisation has a systematic and ethical approach to contemporary collecting
Partnership with community representatives and peers (archives and related professions) to help review existing collecting policy and expand it with a contemporary collecting element
Work with community representatives to support ongoing donations and deposits
Budget identified to support targeted purchase, in support of contemporary collecting
Robust appraisal criteria, to inform acquisition process, in line with sector best practice e.g., UNESCO weighting for collections reflecting underrepresented groups, interests in collections
Collecting is undertaken on the basis of equity and is genuinely participatory to the benefit of both the organisation and the record creator
4 – The organisation proactively pursues contemporary collecting
Budget for purchases is regularly reviewed, in line with contemporary collecting policy
Collecting policies and appraisal criteria are regularly reviewed
Partnerships with Community representatives, internal and external stakeholders are maintained, expanded and regularly reviewed
There is a coherent/holistic approach connecting collecting with outreach
Develops participatory and equitable relationships with record creators to ensure collecting is for the long-term benefit of those record creators
[L] Existing Collections – Reinterpretation / Re-presentation of items
Coverage
Processes to reassess collections for their interest / relevance to diverse communities
Prompts
We are custodians of amazing collections and there is no mandate in EDIB to abandon or marginalize existing collections. There should be a recognition within the service that existing collections potentially cause difficulties for diverse and currently marginalized groups because of some content.
How committed is the service to fully contextualising collections where required?
Is the service inward looking letting staff deal with this issue on their own or does the organisation provide support to staff about the possible implications that the staff may not recognise e.g. causing offence, misrepresentation of a particular community?.
Scoring
0 – The organisation has minimal awareness of the importance of reassessing collections
1 – The organisation is aware of the importance of reassessing collections
2 – The organisation has a basic understanding of the need to reassess collections e.g.
Has included a general statement in the collections policy
Ad hoc review of how individual collections are presented or interpreted
Ad hoc engagement with community representatives, for advice and suggestions
3 – The organisation has a systematic approach to reassessing collections e.g.
Partnership with community representatives and peers (archives and related professions) to help review existing collecting policy and expand it with a reassessment element
Work with community representatives to support ongoing assessments, with re-presentation in catalogues and finding aids, with re-interpretation through articles, blogs, displays etc
Sufficient staff time is committed to a programme of reassessment, re-presentation and reinterpretation
Robust appraisal criteria, to inform reassessment process, in line with sector best practice e.g., ethical reappraisal and deaccessioning
4 – The organisation proactively pursues reassessment
Budget for staff allocations for reassessment and related tasks is regularly reviewed
Collecting policies and appraisal criteria are regularly reviewed
Partnerships with Community representatives, internal and external stakeholders are maintained, expanded and regularly reviewed
[M] Audience engagement
Coverage
The experience for users (current and potential) when engaging with the service onsite, offsite and online
Prompts
Is there diverse audience engagement?
How does it happen?
How is the service building EDIB into its whole range of engagement?
Is EDIB-led engagement an ‘add-on’ or is it recognised by the service as an intrinsic area of activity?
How much support and resource by the service is provided for targeted engagement?
Scoring
0 – The organisation has minimal awareness of the differing needs and aspirations of service users
1 – The organisation is aware of the need to support different needs and aspirations of service users, both current and potential
2- A simple variety of different service provision shaped to users’ needs and aspirations, at a basic level within the organisation, informed by basic evaluation. For example:
Developing one or two new areas of outreach or engagement focused on a specific user group (current or potential)/ community/ interest group which includes seeking feedback from that audience
Have a statement inviting feedback in the reading room and on the website
Reviewing how elements of the public service are presented e.g. website content, advice leaflets
3 – Development of appropriate user services are managed and supported e.g.
Defined audience development goals with supporting work plan and appropriate resourcing
Clear programmes of engagement with specific audiences
Evaluation processes that inform future planning and support advocacy
Senior management encouragement and recognition for developing services to engage a wider range of audiences
4 - - The organisation undertakes continuous process improvement, with proactive management to develop services that engage a diverse range of users
On-going review and evaluation of users and non-users of the services and their experiences
On-going development of services in response to review and evaluation
Horizon-scanning for emerging and future audiences with a view to developing services to meet their needs and aspirations
Undertaking comparator research
Benchmarking of service provision against other organisations across the heritage and information service sectors
[N] Access restriction decisions
Coverage
Processes to ensure that decisions about restricting access affecting collections are transparent and do not favour or disadvantage individuals or communities, whilst observing access requirements under legislation (e.g. GDPR, copyright and Freedom of Information) and also recognising that general access to certain material may be detrimental for particular groups.
Prompts
This is a challenge as a service may hold that material is problematic by being antagonistic or offensive to particularly community groups or marginalised elements in society. This material is closed so ensuring material does survive but is thoughtfully managed.
There may be legitimate reasons for particular researchers to access closed material so how transparent are the closure decisions?
Is the service sufficiently mature to recognise closure reasons requirements are necessary for it to hold the material?
Is the service less mature and just does not want the material on its premises at all to avoid holding problematic material?
Does your service undertake discussion about problematic material with affected groups to explain why it is being held and is not being revered and is being held for specific, principled reasons?
Has the service the capacity, knowledge, contacts, organisational support and confidence to work through those issues?
Scoring
0 – The organisation has minimal awareness of the need for balanced restricted access decisions
1 – The organisation is aware of the need for balanced restricted access decisions
2 – The organisation has a basic understanding of the need for balanced restricted access decisions e.g.
Policy governing access to records for internal, stakeholder, academic, non-academic and independent researchers
Access to Closed Records procedure, covering closure for information legislation, condition, operational reasons, commercial confidence, depositor stipulation, potential harm to specific groups etc
Terms of Deposit specify if and when the depositor can stipulate access restrictions to ensure that discriminatory/ marginalising clauses or clauses that allow privileged access (other than for the record creator) are not included
3 – The organisation has a systematic approach to restricted access decisions e.g.
Partnerships with community representatives and peers (archives and related professions) to help review existing policies, and to reassure and explain why certain access restrictions might apply and in what circumstances
Robust policies and procedures for restricting access to records and opening them when the restrictions have elapsed and operating the access procedure
Full documentation for these policies and procedures – including Terms of Deposit
Sufficient staff time is committed to balanced restricted access decisions
Staff are fully aware of both the policies and procedures, how they support EDIB and their underpinning by legal, contractual and professional standards
4 – The organisation proactively pursues balanced restricted access decisions e.g.
Participates in and leads sector initiatives re: balanced restricted access decisions, including review of professional ethics and standards
Budget for staff allocations for implementing and maintaining balanced restricted access decisions is regularly reviewed
Policies and procedures are regularly reviewed – with a focus on legal, contractual and professional standards
Partnerships with Community representatives, internal and external stakeholders are developed, maintained and reviewed
[O] Community and Peer Support
Coverage
Processes for seeking advice from influencers within communities and acknowledged experts
Prompts
Does the service think it ‘knows best’ or is introverted, or does it seek advice on EDIB matters?
Does the service link with communities, fellow practitioners in other services, get peer support?
Does the service look beyond the boundaries of the archive profession to other sectors to learn e.g. educational, heritage, social services?
Is the archive service engaging with the sector bodies e.g. AWM and the other regional archive forums or specialist archive forums?
Is the service forward thinking in its professional ethos and practices?
Scoring
0 - The organisation has minimal awareness of the need to seek advice
1 - The organisation is aware of the need to seek advice
2 - The organisation has a basic understanding of the need to seek advice:
3 - The organisation has a systematic approach to community and peer support
4 - The organisation proactively pursues community and peer support e.g.
Participates in and leads sector initiatives across the range of EDIB activities affecting archives
Budget for staff allocations engaging with community and peer support
Partnerships with Community representatives, internal and external stakeholders are developed, maintained and reviewed.
Appendix 1 - SAT Worksheet
This worksheet is available as a Word document here.
This worksheet is available as an Excel spreadsheet here.
Appendix 2 Possible sources of information to support the completion of an EDIB SAT
Archive specific
The organisation’s own Archive Service Accreditation application form and supporting documents
The organisation’s own ARA National Visitor Survey results
Data from the Archives Card or reader’s card applications
Code of Ethics for members of the Archives and Records Association
The National Archives’ Inclusion resources https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/archives-sector/advice-and-guidance/running-your-organisation/inclusion/
Internal
Organisational policies e.g. on HR
Organisational performance data
Community impact assessments
Staffing reviews
Community consultations
National Heritage Lottery Fund applications and backing documents
Case studies
Legislative
Equalities legislation
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/equality-act-2010-guidance
GDPR
https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/
Other external sources
Census data
‘Curating for change’ - https://curatingforchange.org
UNESCO Guidelines for measuring cultural participation
https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000217143
