Ohio C2C Regional Meeting Summary Report final

Ohio Connecting to Collections Summary of Regional Meetings held in July 2010 Following on the success of the Ohio “Connecting to Collections” online survey project and the May 7, 2010 Preservation Summit meeting, the project partners scheduled a series of five regional meetings around the state These half-day sessions were somewhat similar in nature to the Summit, but focused even more on providing preservation information resources to the cultural heritage institution staff members and volunteers working in organizations in Ohio Overall, the Regional Meetings attracted a total of 110 participants Reflecting the wide spectrum of cultural institutions in the state, meetings were scheduled at a variety of organizational types The meeting dates, host institutions, cities, and numbers of attendees are listed below A brief synopsis of the presentations at each site is followed by a review of the key questions and discussion topics at each site July 15, 2010: attendees July 20, 2010: July 21, 2010: attendees July 26, 2010: July 29, 2010: 23 attendees National Underground Railroad Freedom Center, Cincinnati, OH – 26 Athens Public Library, Athens, OH – 10 attendees Beeghly Library, Ohio Wesleyan University, Delaware, OH – 20 Bedford Historical Society, Cleveland, OH – 31 attendees Jerome Library, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH – Representatives of each of the Ohio Heritage Partner organizations had a role in presenting at the regional meeting sessions Speakers included key staff members from the State Library of Ohio, the Ohio Historical Society, the Intermuseum Conservation Association, and LYRASIS (the project consultant’s organization) At each regional meeting, topics addressed included a Background and Introduction to the Project; a Discussion of Survey Results and Overview of the Summit (particularly focusing on breakout group discussions at the Summit meeting); a featured presentation on “Educational Resources and How to Prioritize Collection Needs;” and a discussion on the State of Digital Preservation, which also built on findings from the May Summit At each of the regional meeting sessions, there was time for questions and discussion both between presentations and at the end of the meeting Important issues from each of the meetings are detailed below, specific to the meeting site Cincinnati: Discussion ranged widely from a request for a sample preservation position description for cultural heritage institutions, to making sure that education offerings in preservation are available for both Intermediate- and Advanced-level institutions, as well as those for institutions just beginning preservation activities Another area of interest was in the revival of the Cincinnati Alliance for Response initiative, which began in 2004 as a way to bring together cultural heritage staff and emergency managers/responders to discuss disaster planning, mitigation, and recovery issues Other “hot topics” included deaccessioning practices among museums, the need for more instruction in metadata for digital objects, and interest in grant writing workshops and strategies Athens: Discussion at this session included a testimonial for the high quality of the Northeast Document Conservation Center (NEDCC) online workshop, “Preservation 101” as basic instruction in the field Audience members spoke of getting questions on how to preserve materials at home; the Athens County Historical Society and Museum announced that they were doing a workshop in July focused on this topic Interest was expressed in disaster plan-writing workshops, and the ability to utilize a “mobile scanning lab” for digitization if this could be one of the services offered in the Ohio Connecting to Collections Implementation program A final topic was how to work with dangerous artifacts, including weapons, degraded film stock, and taxidermy specimens Delaware/Columbus Area: There was quite a bit of discussion on identifying important private collections in need of preservation, and also in topics related to caring for personal treasures The development of collection policies was an important topic, and both at and after the workshop, there were numerous questions about fundraising and grant writing for preservation and digitization Bedford/Cleveland Area: Although part of the presentation on the survey results focused on funding sources for preservation, there were additional questions from the audience about categories and deadlines for grants Participants were very interested in assistance in grant development The Foundation Center collections in Cleveland and Akron/Summit County were mentioned, as was a Kent State Universitysponsored workshop on designing successful library grant projects Bowling Green: There was interest from participants in this session in the availability of model disaster plans which they could adapt to their institution Additionally in disaster planning, people wanted assistance in helping to determine salvage priorities for their materials Metadata issues for digital collections was an area of interest here, as participants wanted to know more about mapping and crosswalking metadata between different types of institutions and collections Regional meetings focused on single topics in preservation were suggested; one approach was to be able to have a forum in which to compare and share preservation plans and policies Tailoring information on collection management and funding to small, volunteer-based institutions was also seen as important Preservation funding – potentially from local sources such as community foundations – was identified as an important issue as well A final thread of discussion at this session was on deaccessioning practices for cultural heritage institutions Overall Trends: The Ohio Connecting to Collections Regional Meeting Series allowed for additional discussion and information dissemination on important preservation topics with a variety of cultural heritage staff and volunteers from around the state During the discussions, there were a number of areas of interest expressed by the meeting attendees which should be considered for focus on and inclusion in any Connecting to Collections Implementation Grant from Ohio The key topics which were discussed at length, in more than one meeting, include: • • • • Preserving personal collections Grants and funding assistance for preservation and digitization Resource information for developing disaster plans Development of collection policies, including deaccessioning practices • Metadata issues for digitized collections As many of the regional meeting attendees were representing smaller museums, libraries, and historical societies, making sure educational and informational activities are geared to this type of institution is very important, although the needs of larger institutions must be addressed as well In conjunction with the preservation training and assistance needs which surfaced in both the project Web Survey and at the May Summit meeting, all of these topics should be regarded as areas for emphasis in further workshops, presentations, and information provision from the Ohio Heritage Partnership group Report submitted by Tom Clareson, Senior Consultant for New Initiatives, LYRASIS ... as well A final thread of discussion at this session was on deaccessioning practices for cultural heritage institutions Overall Trends: The Ohio Connecting to Collections Regional Meeting Series... May Summit meeting, all of these topics should be regarded as areas for emphasis in further workshops, presentations, and information provision from the Ohio Heritage Partnership group Report submitted... for digitization if this could be one of the services offered in the Ohio Connecting to Collections Implementation program A final topic was how to work with dangerous artifacts, including weapons,