Post No. 3 CLIR REPORT

This post will highlight a resource that would be valuable for any archivist working for a small institution. Earlier this year, in January, the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR ) published Archival Management Software: A Report for the Council on Library and Information Resources. Written by Lisa Spiro the report is perhaps one of the more important resources out there regarding not only Archivist’s Toolkit but available technological resources in general. The 119 page document can be found at: http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/spiro2009.html.

The report was written as a means to examine the problem of backlogs within archives and how software can help make archives more efficient and their collections more accessible. Spiro examines a number of collection management programs including Archon, Archivists' Toolkit (AT), Cuadra STAR, Eloquent Archive and Collective Access. But the author makes it clear that she is not evaluating the different programs but rather “this report compares features and reports on the experiences of archivists in implementing them.”

Spiro points out that “No single archival management system will be appropriate for every archive, given the variation in technical support available at the institution and the need for particular features.” But she offers criteria for deciding which software to use.

· Automating the processing and description of collections through the archival management system versus generating EAD by hand and managing collections through other software
· Open source versus commercial-noting that this is perhaps the most “fundamental choice that archives will make”
· Weather the system is Hosted on the server of another company or a local institution
· Cost
· Sustainability
· Quality of customer support
· Support for archival standards
· Web-based versus desktop client
· Support for publishing finding aids online versus generating EAD for export
· Support for linking to digital objects
· Support for collection management
· Reports, statistics, and project management
· Reliability and maturity

Roughly 20 pages of the report are dedicated to an in-depth examination of five different software programs including Archivist’s Toolkit. The section dealing with Archivists Toolkit consists of excellent commentary from five archivists who use the software. She breaks downs the comments into seven sections covering such subjects as Reasons for Selecting AT, Ease of use, installation and maintenacne, easoe of customization, the user comminites, weaknesses and strenghts.

Overall Spiro’s report is valuable for two reasons. It is a valuable tool for any archivist, especially ones working in small institutions, who is faced with making a decision about what program to use. Using this report an archivist should be able to make an informed decision with the overall impression that whatever you decide to do there are positives and negatives and that you really should carefully look both at the programs and at the unique needs of your institution. The report is also important in the information it provides on a number of software programs including Archivist’s Toolkit. Taken as a whole the comments seem to indicate a general satisfaction with Archivists Toolkit but that it is still a work in progress and there remains some problems to be worked out.


Spiro, L. (n.d.). Archival Management Software: A Report for the Council on Library and Information Resources. Retrieved November 12, 2009, from Council on Library and Information Resouces: http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/spiro2009.html