INFOcus October 2007

www.LYPonline.com

Special Report

 

Starting a Branch Repair Training Program

by Beth Doyle

 

For years, library preservation departments have wrestled with the problem of how to structure repair workflow to accommodate the collection needs and the department resources. Many programs opt to centralize the repair workflow so that all of the work funnels through one unit, while other institutions choose to decentralize the workflow so that repairs are performed at the local level. This issue of centralization vs. decentralization is even more critical when discussing repair workflow options for branch libraries.

 

Duke University Libraries consists of the main library, seven branch libraries and the Duke University Archives. The general and rare collections consist of over five million monographs, two million public documents and 11 million manuscripts, films, videos, music recordings and other non-print media. The conservation unit has one full-time conservator and three full-time technicians who are responsible for repairing or rehousing both circulating and rare collection materials. We quip that our repair backlog is the entire library, but that quip holds a truth since we have a large demand for our services and a small staff to address that demand.

 

To help meet this demand, we have developed a pilot program to train selected branch-library staff members to perform minor repairs at the branch. The Association of Research Libraries defines “minor repair” as any repair that takes 15 minutes or less to complete. This program has three main benefits. It provides better access to materials by reducing the time an item is out of circulation awaiting repair. It allows conservation staff to focus on more complicated repairs,

permitting us to better use our technicians’ time and skills. Finally, it allows branch library staff to have direct control over some of the repair and pamphlet binding decisions, especially important for specialized materials such as music.

 

Criteria for Selecting Participants

We have developed four main criteria for selecting the branch staff member who will participate in this program.

 

  1. The chosen staff member must have interest in the project and book repair in general.
  2. The trainee must possess certain core competencies. Including some eye-hand coordination, the ability to quickly learn new skills and work and solve problems independently. Since the candidates may not have book repair experience, learning to identify eye-hand coordination is important. We look for hobbies that require the ability to learn new concepts, manual dexterity and attention to detail. These may include quilting, knitting, fly-tying and computer games.
  3. Branch directors and direct supervisors must support the project and take concrete steps to ensure its success.
  4. The branch director must offer tangible support including allowing time for off-site training, dedicating space for an in-house repair station and allocating funds to purchase additional supplies and tools as needed.

 

Tools and Supplies

The Conservation Unit provides a supply kit to each participant at the beginning of the training session. The tools and small equipment in the kit are “on loan” from the Conservation Unit and will be returned if the branch discontinues the project. We also provide the supplies to get the program started. Our kits were assembled with existing lab supplies and supplemented with a few items purchased from the local craft-supply store. The target budget for the supply kit, including tools and materials, was $150. The total cost came to $155. (See below.) A copy of our lab manual with repair instructions is also supplied as a reference guide. Paper towels, distilled water, waste paper and similar supplies are supplied by the branch.

 

Small Equipment

·         Awl

·         Bone folder

·         Brushes for glue and paste

·         Exacto knife

·         Gaylord book press

·         (already in lab)

·         Knife, bookbinders

·         Knitting needles (4)

·         Micro spatula

·         Ruler (18" cork back, metal)

·         Scissors

·         Sewing needles

·         Tweezer

·         Weights, bag style (2)

·         Plastic shoe box for supplies

·         Small plastic containers

·         for adhesives

 

Supplies

·         Methyl cellulose

·         Pre-cooked wheat

·         starch paste

·         PVA

·         Beeswax

·         Mars eraser

·         Exacto blades (5-pack)

·         Linen thread 18/3

·         Mending tissue

·         (Barrett Guard Strip)

·         Mending tissue (Kizukishi)

·         Vinyl sponge

 

Training

The Collections Conservator conducts the training in the conservation lab. Each participant spends one day a week for six weeks with the conservator learning pamphlet binding and several minor repairs. Trainees can work on their own  branch materials that they bring with them, or materials from the main library that are in the lab awaiting repair. We also expect them to practice between sessions at their branch. We train participants to perform the following repairs:

 

·         hinge tightening

·         internal hinge repair

·         tip-in and hinge-in of errata and loose pages

·         photocopy replacement of missing pages

·         mend tears with wheat starch paste and Japanese tissue

·         open uncut pages

·         dry clean dirt

·         pamphlet binding sewn and stapled through the fold and side stapled

·         guard loose sheets into sections for sewing into pamphlet binders

·         create pockets for accompanying materials

 

In addition to teaching repairs, we spend time discussing the selection of materials for repair. We discuss how to identify, evaluate and sort damaged materials as well as how to set up an efficient work flow. It is also important for the trainee to understand when a repair may go beyond their skills or knowledge base and to set it aside for the conservation staff.

 

Once training is complete, the conservator schedules a follow-up session at the branch to discuss the physical set-up of  the repair station, selection process and to answer any questions. The conservator also instructs staff to begin sending minor repairs to the in-house repair station rather than sending the items to the conservation lab. Additional meetings are scheduled as needed and should take place at least quarterly to be sure the program is progressing and there are no surprise problems.

 

Evaluation

Each participant is required to keep monthly repair statistics for the conservator. These are used to evaluate their progress and are included in the annual ARL statistical report. In addition to statistics, the conservator uses the on-site evaluations to check the progress and quality of the repairs. If any concerns arise, the conservator and staff member can address and correct them during the visits.

 

In addition to the standard training regimen, participants may also schedule refresher training whenever they feel they need to hone their skills. This training can take place either at the branch or conservation lab. Branch participants are also welcome at other training sessions including disaster recovery and exhibit preparation workshops.

 

Goals

We expect to see 400 additional minor repairs performed yearly at each branch that participates in this program. The amount of repairs performed in any given period will vary depending on personal performance and workload of each individual. It is important to set realistic performance goals that take into consideration the other duties that person must perform.

Pros and Cons

As stated earlier, the program has three main benefits. It reduces the time an item is out of  circulation awaiting repair, allows conservation staff to concentrate on more complicated repairs by removing some minor repairs from their workflow and enables the branches to control some of the repair workflow. The program also benefits the library as a whole. It provides professional development opportunities at a low cost to the institution. It also fosters cooperation across branches and units, which is an important goal of our administration.

 

The Conservation Unit benefits in several ways. It raises awareness of what we do across the library system, our faces and services more visible, offer opportunities to carry out our outreach mission and to repair more books per year.

 

Branches with specialized pamphlet binding needs, such as our Music Library, have staff that understand the idiosyncrasies of the material. Training them to do pamphlet binding and minor repairs means that they can often take on the treatment without needing to convey special instructions to the Conservation Unit. When a repair is beyond their skill level, technicians are better positioned to describe the required treatment to the Conservation Unit.

 

When contemplating a similar program, consider the following challenges. If your trainee is promoted out of the position, a new person who meets the selection criteria must be identified and complete the training program before repair work can continue. If staff turnover is high, the benefits may not outweigh the time and effort of constant training.

 

There is no daily supervision of the work accomplished at a branch library. Since the direct supervisor of the trainee may not know enough about the repair procedures to provide feedback or perform quality control, the conservator may need to train the supervisor to perform quality control and to recognize potential problems. Since this person is performing repairs independently from the conservation lab, there is a possibility that ongoing problems will be unanswered or uncorrected for a lengthy period of time. Communication and site visits are important to ensure a quality product and to maintain the skills of the newly trained staff member.

 

Finally, branch libraries almost always seem to have fewer staff members than needed. Adding more responsibilities to an already strained workforce can be difficult and the quality of the work suffers. Therefore the trainee must maintain a realistic work schedule that accommodates the new responsibilities of repair work. This has been the hardest problem to resolve and one we continue to assess.

 

What Would We Do Differently?

We have identified several areas to improve upon since completing the first pilot training project. Changes we will make to the program include:

 

  1. Build performance expectations into the job description and annual review.
  2. Finalize the staff member’s bench schedule with the supervisor before work begins at the branch. It is important to have a schedule that benefits all of the parties and one that will be maintained in the long term. The schedule must be followed as closely as possible if the program is to succeed.
  3. Schedule quarterly reviews with the repair staff and their supervisor to be sure that the program is meeting everyone’s expectations and to address any problems that may arise.
  4. Request that the technician’s supervisor periodically send random samples of the repair work to the conservation lab for quality assurance.
  5. On the technical side, we will purchase tacking irons for our supply kits and provide two-centimeter-wide rolls of Filmoplast R heat-activated repair tissue to replace the Japanese tissue and wheat starch paste repair procedure. This new product will be easier and faster to use and will cost about the same as the wheat starch paste and Japanese tissue that it replaces. We originally had several pounds of pre-cooked paste on hand and used this in our supply kits rather than purchasing new supplies such as the Filmoplast R.

 

Conclusion

We have successfully completed the branch repair pilot project on schedule and within budget. We hope to achieve our goals of increased number of repairs, faster turnaround time and better service to our branch libraries by continuing and improving the program. We believe the benefits of this project outweigh the difficulties of administering the program.

 

This model can also serve as a starting point for any small library that wants to begin a repair program. Several regional centers offer high quality basic book repair workshops at affordable enrollment fees if an on-site conservator is not available. The cost of the supplies may be slightly higher since the equipment may not be on hand, but should not pose an undue burden on the supply budget.

 

Beth Doyle is the Collections Conservator at Duke University, Perkins Library, Preservation Department, Durham, NC. Article courtesy of Archival Products.