UNDERSTANDING SUCCESS
Measuring Effectiveness of Preservation and Security Programs
|
15. Measuring the Effectiveness of Preservation and
Security Programs at the Library of Congress
Francis M. Ponti
Institutions must find accurate and
cost-effective ways to assess the effectiveness of their
preservation and security programs and to balance access with
protection. They need to determine how well controls are working and
what needs to be done to correct deficienciesand then to
demonstrate to funders that the money being spent is achieving the
stated goals. In large institutions, conducting a full inventory and
then periodically measuring changes is often not practicable. Rather,
institutions can use statistically valid selection and measuring
techniques to estimate the status of the total population of items.
This paper describes different sampling methods and
identifies sampling projects undertaken at the Library of Congress. It
discusses designing and developing a statistically valid baseline and
then using carefully controlled measurements to determine the status of
controls in place. Armed with accurate measurements, the institution can
make informed decisions about implementing remedies proportional to the
risk.
Since its founding, the Library of Congress has been
entrusted with the preservation of major works in
history, literature, the arts, science, language, and a variety of
emerging cultural works. In addition, the Copyright Office function
adds hundreds of thousands of works in various formats to the
collections each year. The Library staff must find new ways to store,
catalog, secure, and preserve many of these works for future
generations to come. At the same time, the Library must make its
collections relatively open to public observation and use by scholars
and private citizens alike. The challenge is to find the balance between
these competing goals, namely preservation and protection versus public
accessibility.
Beginning in the 1970s, staff observations and formal
studies funded by the Library indicated that public access had
resulted in missing materials; defacing of texts, manuscripts, posters,
and pictures; and wearing out of materials because of use.
To prevent the first two areas of concern, the
Library needed to tighten security and change its methods of serving
materials to the public. Library management wanted to be sure that
installation of security measures would be done in proportion to the
risk involvedbut there had to be a balance. Overreaction was to
be avoided. For example, it was not feasible to simply close access to
most areas. Security experts were consulted, with the result that the
security staff was augmented and professionals in the field were
hired.
During the 1990s, the Library implemented many innovative
security features, several of which involved preventative measures
incorporating location and access controls. Other features involved
observational and search measures. However, none of these security
features pose a major threat to public access.
Installing security and control features can be very
costly The Congress wanted to know whether or not the new security
measures were working and, if so, whether or not they
were worth the cost. Because much of the cost of
security is ongoing, such concerns continue to affect the budget
annually.
Measurement of improvement in security and reduction
in risk usually involves establishing a baseline and then following up
with multiple periods of specific attribute measurements. Some
security-minded managers believe that before security features are
installed, a baseline wall-to-wall inventory should be taken,
followed by another complete inventory in a future period. Making
complete inventories for the Library of Congress or for sections within
it, however, would be extremely costly and time-consuming. By the time
such an inventory was completed, major changes could have taken place,
rendering the information from the inventory useless or outdated. The
large expenditure of funds would have been wasted.
For almost a century now, business managers in public
and private institutions alike have been using quality assurance and
control studies involving statistical sampling to save both time and
money. When the universe of items to be studied is very large, the
institution can use a probability sample of reasonably small size to
estimate the condition of that larger universe. With probability
selection, we can place reliability bounds on the estimate and provide
as precise an estimate as is needed by both management and oversight
groupsin the case of the Library, these groups include the General
Accounting Office, the Library's Inspector General, and congressional
staff. There is an extremely large and varied literature involving the
theory and application of statistical sampling to such problems. Both
government agencies and universities use these methods. In the
Washington, D.C., area, there is no lack of qualified experts in the
field.
Sampling with known probabilities of selection allows
extrapolation of results to the broader population of items or to
locations from which the sample was drawn. Types of
sampling plans include:
(1) simple random (equal probability),
(2) stratified random (equal probabilities within subgroups),
(3) cluster or multistage (hierarchical sets of probabilities),
(4) probability proportional to size,
(5) cohort group sampling over time, and
(6) paneled sampling with "births and deaths" over time.
These and other techniques can be tailored to provide
efficient and effective measurements with high confidence and precise
estimates, but at a much lower cost than a complete inventory of a
population. Sampling for measurement of change (because of security or
control measures, for example) must also start with a baseline. However,
this baseline can be the result of a carefully designed statistical
sample. Subsequent samples can then be done over time to measure change
within the bounds of statistical significance.
The Library has designed more than a half-dozen
sampling plans for its various entities. A few of these plans have been
funded, and the results of the testing have been helpful to management
in understanding the status of the collections at any given point in
time. We were not able to start these samples with a natural baseline at
the point where security measures were installed, however, so it is
difficult to know the total value of these measurements. If sampling is
repeated at regular intervals, management will be able to measure the
improvement or deterioration of the collections and evaluate the results
in terms either of security control matters or of condition based on
normal wear, tear, and deterioration through time.
Because of the lack of a meaningful baseline at the
Library in any of its divisions, we had to choose a place to start,
with the goal of measuring change through time. We applied
sampling techniques to the Prints and Photographs Division and to the
National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped
inventory of reading machines for the blind. We were able to study
Library holdings for existence and completeness as well as quality.
With a baseline, we will be able to measure both quantitative and
qualitative benefits of installed controls and security measures. These
could then be compared to quantitative and qualitative costs of the
installed controls in order to provide the net benefit of the
installation and operation of such controls. The key to success in
measuring the net benefit is the continuation of sampling and
statistical analysis through time.
Although it is true that measurement and testing
alone will not fix the problem (actions must be taken and money must be
spent to do that), nevertheless such analysis techniques will permit
management and oversight authorities to discover and highlight the
extent of a problem and the extent of improvement achieved because of
actions taken by management.
chap15.html
|