Standards Development and Review

Responsibilities of the Standards Committee

A primary responsibility of the Standards Committee is to oversee the process of initiating, developing, reviewing, and approving all standards developed by the Society of American Archivists through its subgroups, as well as reviewing standards submitted by external groups to SAA for its endorsement.

The Standards Committee works with groups on standards and standards-related projects from the initiation of the proposal, through development or review, to submission of the standard to the SAA Council for final approval.

For additional information about Standards Committee procedures:

• Procedures for Review and Approval of an SAA-Developed Standard
• Standards Creation/Revision Outline
• Standards Creation/Revision Flowchart
• Procedures for SAA Endorsement of an External Standard

Standards

The SAA Standards Committee defines a “standard” to be an industry agreement that establishes qualities or practices that make possible sharing of information, development of common vocabularies and practices, and more effective interaction among archivists, librarians, records managers, information managers, preservation administrators, historians, and other allied professionals. SAA standards must be approved by the SAA Council and they are maintained and periodically reviewed by professionals in the community.

Standards of many types are now central to archival practice. This document will generally use the term “standards” to refer to all of these types, including standards used in automated information systems, in preservation management, and in other technical areas, as well as standards and guidelines relating to professional practice.

Standards can take many forms:

• The most exacting are technical standards (e.g., Z39.50, the standard for intersystem data searching and retrieval) which, if applied correctly, can be expected to produce uniform and consistent results.
• Conventions or rules are more flexible and can accommodate more variation in local practice (e.g., Describing Archives: A Content Standard [DACS]). They will produce similar, but not necessarily identical, results when applied consistently.
• Guidelines provide models of preferred practices and/or serve as criteria against which to measure products or programs (e.g., Archival and Special Collections Facilities Guidelines for Archivists, Librarians, Architects, and Engineers).
• Best practices are procedures and guidelines based on experience and research that demonstrate that they are optimal and efficient means to produce a desired result.¹ Best practices represent consensus on archival practice.

The Standards Committee will not be concerned with the creation and maintenance of thesauri.

Developing Standards within SAA

The Society of American Archivists recognizes the central importance of consensus to the development of standards. However, consensus on a specific standard may not always equate with unanimous and unqualified approval by all concerned, for in most cases this will be difficult to achieve.

The Standards Committee procedures for standards development within SAA mandate broad review of any proposed standard by all groups, both inside and outside of SAA, that have an interest in the standard. Important features of the review process are:

• Establishment of the need for the standard through a formal "request for initiation of a standards project";
• Publication of notices in appropriate SAA media about initiation and ongoing progress in standards development projects;
• Publication and/or distribution of full texts of proposed standards by the SAA office; and
• Formal invitations to representatives from outside organizations to participate in the development and/or review of drafts of proposed standards.

The Standards Committee is concerned both with the development of new standards and with the process of standards maintenance and review.

The best possible effort will be made to ensure that all reasonable opinions are considered in the development process and that most disputes are resolved before a document is deemed ready for the Council's consideration as an SAA standard.

Final adoption of a document as an SAA standard rests with the Council of the Society of American Archivists.

Once a standard is adopted, an ongoing technical subcommittee of the Standards Committee is assigned maintenance responsibilities to ensure that the document is promulgated widely, monitored in its application, and reviewed (and, if necessary, revised) on a regular schedule.

The Standards Committee has prepared detailed procedures for standards development and review.

SAA also plays an important role as a participant in work undertaken by other organizations that develop technical standards, such as the National Information Standards Organization (NISO) and the Association for Information and Image Management (AIIM).

Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Requirements for SAA Standards

One of SAA’s core values is ensuring the diversity of its membership and leaders, the profession, and the archival record. We expect SAA-endorsed standards to reflect this commitment to a diverse and inclusive profession. Groups working on standards revisions or development are expected to articulate how the standard/revision addresses individual, institutional, or geographic diversity, or supports the development, inclusion, and stewardship of a diverse profession or cultural record.

For Information or Assistance

The Standards Committee is ready to assist any SAA subgroup or outside organization to devise a strategy for developing a new standard or for reviewing and/or revising an existing document so that it can be considered for formal adoption as an SAA standard. Please contact the co-chairs of the Standards Committee for further information. [Member Roster]

Approved by SAA Council: June 1995
Revised: February 2010, January 2012, October 2023, June 2024

 

---

¹ The Standards Committee has modified the best practice definition from: A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology. Retrieved May 26, 2009, from: http://www.archivists.org/glossary/term_details.asp?DefinitionKey=1770

Attachment	Size
SAAStandardsWorkflow_20231012.pdf	71.38 KB
Standards Committee_ Standard Creation_Revision_Outline_20231012.docx.pdf	70.16 KB
SAA Standards Process Flow Chart.pdf	29.21 KB
Standard Creation_Revision_Outline_v3_20240625.pdf	76.05 KB

Procedures for Review and Approval of an SAA-Developed Standard

Submission of a Proposal for a Project to Create, Revise, or Review an SAA-Developed Standard

Proposals must be submitted by official groups within the SAA (including committees, technical subcommittees, boards, sections, task forces, and working groups). Individuals interested in the development of a standard may consult with the Standards Committee about groups that are appropriate for submission of a standards proposal.

I.A. The proposing group shall:

Complete and submit the Proposal for Standards Development form. The form requires the following information:

• Whether this is a new or revised standard;
• Name of SAA component group that is making the proposal;
• Name of individual to contact with complete contact information;
• Date submitted;
• Title of the standard (working titles are acceptable)
• Type of standard according to the definitions in the Standards Development and Review documentation:
  • Technical Standard, Convention and/or Rules, Guidelines, Best Practices;
  • Topic(s) of the standard:  
  • Administration and Management
  • Appraisal and Acquisition
  • Arrangement and Description
  • Digitization
  • Education
  • Ethics, Values, and Legal Affairs
  • Outreach and Exhibitions
  • Preservation
  • Privacy and Confidentiality
  • Records and Information Management
  • Reference and Access
• Concise statement (not to exceed 1,000 words) of the following:
  • Identified need for the standard revision or creation;
  • Expected effect/impact on individual archivists and/or archival institutions;
  • Scope of coverage/application; and
  • Anticipated format and content of the standard;
• Provide a list of existing standards that are closely related to or affected by the proposed standard.
• Concise description (not to exceed 1,000 words) of other SAA subgroups, outside organizations, and experts who will be consulted during the development or will be asked to review the standard before it is submitted for adoption by the SAA Council;
  • In all cases, the Standards Committee expects consultation with the Diversity Committee and the Accessibility and Disability Section. 
• An indication of how the standard/revision and the process to develop or revise it will incorporate diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility principles. Aspects that you could consider addressing include, but are not limited to:
  • Consideration for/consultation with/involvement of multiple types of institutions (e.g., academic, corporate, government, religious etc.).
  • Consideration for/consultation with institutions in multiple geographic regions.
  • Consideration for/involvement of persons at multiple career points (e.g., mid-career, student, retired, paraprofessional, temporary, etc.), researchers, and persons in allied fields.
  • Consideration for/consultation with people with disabilities, multiple gender identities, multiple sexual orientations, multiple racial/ethnic identities or nationalities, multiple religious backgrounds, and diverse economic status.
  • Positionality statements reflecting on the unique identities of the committee members in relation to the standard.

• Timeline for development process that gives adequate time for communications with and review by other SAA subgroups, outside organizations, experts that should be consulted, and the membership at large; and
• Budgetary implications for SAA, including direct costs for meetings, travel, copying, and postage as well as indirect costs for SAA staff time.

I.B. The Standards Committee co-chairs shall:

I.B.1. Acknowledge receipt of the proposal to the individuals who submitted it and notify the Standards Committee of the proposal submission.

I.B.2. Distribute copies of the proposal to the other members of the Standards Committee, including the subgroup chairs and the SAA Council liaison. Subgroup chairs may distribute the proposal to their technical subcommittee or development and review team for comment.

I.B.3. Collect comments and suggestions from members of the Standards Committee and other subgroups to which the proposal was distributed.

I.B.4. If comments warrant further discussion, arrange for communications to determine if there is a consensus to endorse the proposal.

II. Standards Committee Action in Response to Proposal

The Standards Committee will take a formal vote in response to the proposal, and will take one of the following actions in response to a proposal, as appropriate:

II.A. Return for revision

The Standards Committee will return to the proposing group a proposal that is incomplete or that requires revision and request that it be revised and resubmitted.

Reasons for returning the proposal may include, but are not limited to:

• Insufficient consultation with other SAA subgroups, outside organizations, and experts;
• Lack of consultation with the Diversity Committee and the Accessibility and Disability Section to ensure that diversity, inclusion, and accessibility are considered in the standard/revision itself and the process to develop or revise it; 
• Not showing enough consideration of current literature and reports related to the standard;
• Insufficient or inaccessible community-wide communication and feedback.

This process ideally occurs no more than once, but may occur more than once if needed.

II.B. Decline proposal

The Standards Committee may decline to recommend undertaking a standards project because:

• A similar standard already exists;
• The proposed standard is in direct conflict with an SAA-adopted standard or policy;
• Another group is already working on a similar standard (in which case the Standards Committee will suggest that the two parties work together toward common ends);
• There is insufficient demand or potential benefit to SAA members to warrant the expense of its development;
• The proposed standard does not fall within the scope of the Standards Committee.

The Standards Committee will forward all declined proposals to the SAA Council along with the reason why the Standards Committee does not recommend the proposal. The proposing group may file an appeal with the SAA Council within 60 days of notification by the Committee.

II.C. Submit request for Council approval to undertake project

If the Standards Committee is satisfied with the proposal, it will be submitted with a recommendation by the Committee to the Council for final approval. The Standards Committee will send the Standard Proposal Form and any accompanying correspondence or other documentation to the SAA Council for approval to undertake the project.

II.C.1. Make assignment to primary group for development

For standards already maintained by an existing technical subcommittee or other appointed group, the Standards Committee co-chairs will prepare a draft charge based on the revision proposal and review it with the appointed group’s co-chairs. Upon finalizing that plan, the appointed group shall proceed with its work. 

For standards without an existing technical subcommittee or other group, the Standards Committee co-chairs will prepare a draft charge for the development and review team and make recommendations for its membership. In most cases, the members of the proposing group will be included in the recommendation for membership of the development and review team. The charge must then be approved by the SAA Council before the SAA vice president / president-elect appoints the chair(s) and members of the development and review team. Once the standard is adopted, the team will be disbanded by the SAA Council and the Council will either assign the standard to an existing component group or create a technical subcommittee to maintain and review the adopted standard (see V.C.I.).

II.C.2. Announcement of standards project

The Standards Committee co-chairs will notify the co-chairs of the proposing group(s) of the approval of the project. Subsequently, the co-chairs of the group(s) responsible for developing the standard will publish a “Notice of Intention to Initiate a Standards Development Project” via all appropriate SAA communication channels. This step is taken to notify the membership that a project will soon be under way and to solicit comments and participation from interested parties. Any comments will be sent to both the Standards Committee co-chairs and the co-chairs of the proposing group. Official project approval will be granted automatically 30 days after publication of the "Notice" unless the comments received by the Standards Committee co-chairs are such that the proposal warrants reconsideration, in which case the Committee will refer the proposal and comments back to the proposing group for review and response.

III. Standards Development Process

In the course of developing a new standard, development and review teams shall complete the following actions:

III.A. Consultation with other SAA subgroups and external organizations

The development and review team will engage in extensive consultation with interested parties inside and outside of SAA that are essential to the development of standards, and must submit to the Standards Committee evidence that such consultation has taken place. The development and review team must address all written comments sent to the group and all comments made at an SAA open meeting. The Standards Committee will assist the development and review team in publicizing the project and identifying consultants.

Consultation should be pursued through several means, such as:

• Letters sent at the beginning of the project to heads of organizations known to have an interest in the standard under development, inviting their comments and/or participation in the development process, as appropriate.
• Publication of notices in the newsletters or on the websites of these organizations about the intention to develop the standard and, later, providing updates on the progress of the development project.
• Publication of the draft standard in appropriate SAA media.
• Publication of the draft standard in external publications and/or circulation of the draft standard to heads of interested organizations.
• Circulation of the draft standard to groups and individuals, inside and outside of SAA, with particular interest or expertise in the topic, including posting on electronic networks.
• Joint meetings with interested organizations to discuss common concerns. These meetings could occur at the outset of the project or after circulation of a draft standard.
• Open forums or hearings at the SAA annual meeting.

III.B. Preparation of the package containing the final draft of the standard and supporting documentation

Once it has completed the consultation process and prepared the final draft of the standard, the development and review team will compile a package to forward to the Standards Committee for its review. This package will include:

III.B.1. Full text of the proposed standard.

III.B.2. Introductory narrative.

This section, which should not exceed 1,000 words, must include the scope of application, in particular:

• The purpose or objective of the proposed standard and
• The specific audiences, circumstances, or techniques to which it is directed.
• It should also contain background and other supplementary information, as necessary, that can provide a context for understanding how the standard was developed and when and how it will be used, including
  • Brief history and methodology of its development,
  • Participants in the development process,
  • Relationship to predecessor documents,
  • Significant changes from earlier versions,
  • Glossary or definitions of terms, if necessary,
  • Illustrations or examples of how the standard can be applied, and
  • Bibliography, if necessary.

 III.B.3. Documentation of the consultation process.

The development and review team must submit documentation that the consultation process has taken place and that a reasonable agreement has been reached on the contents and intent of the proposed standard. This evidence may take the form of:

• Copies of correspondence from other organizations supporting the proposed standard;
• Excerpts from publications and/or websites that publicized the development project or published drafts of the standard;
• Copies of correspondence discussing areas of dispute in the proposed standard;
• In case of unresolved disputes, explanations from the group responsible for development of efforts made to accommodate the expressed concerns and/or justification for approving the standard in the absence of universal agreement.
• Statement of how the group followed through on its proposal to ensure that the standard/revision itself, and the process to develop or revise it, has incorporated diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility principles. Aspects that could be addressed include, but are not limited to:
  • Consideration for/consultation with/involvement of multiple types of institutions (e.g., academic, corporate, government, religious etc.).
  • Consideration for/consultation with institutions in multiple geographic regions.
  • Consideration for/involvement of persons at multiple career points (e.g., mid-career, student, retired, paraprofessional, temporary, etc.), researchers, and persons in allied fields.
  • Consideration for/consultation with people with disabilities, multiple gender identities, multiple sexual orientations, multiple racial/ethnic identities or nationalities, multiple religious backgrounds, and diverse economic status.
  • Positionality statements reflecting on the unique identities of the committee members in relation to the standard.

 III.B.4. Maintenance and review plan.

The development and review team must recommend a plan for maintenance and review of the standard it has developed. Standards developed by SAA will be assigned to a component group, such as a technical subcommittee, for necessary maintenance and review. Each will be either assigned to a review cycle of no more than 5 years, or approved for ongoing review. At the end of a set review cycle, the SAA Council will be asked by the Standards Committee to reaffirm, revise, or rescind the standard. The "Maintenance and Review Plan" will suggest the appropriate subgroup for assignment and type of review process. (See V.C. - V.E.)

III.B.5 Format of the package

The package should be prepared in and sent to the Standards Committee in PDF format attached to an email to the co-chairs, or by another method deemed acceptable by all parties.

III.C. Notice of abandoned project

In the event that the development and review team fails to reach general agreement on a draft standard or, for whatever reason, chooses to discontinue its work on the proposed standard, it shall notify the Standards Committee that it has abandoned the project. The Standards Committee shall publish a notice in appropriate SAA media that the project has been discontinued.

IV. Standards Committee Review of Draft Standard

Upon receiving the final draft package from the development and review team, the Standards Committee will take the following actions:

IV.A. Review package

The Standards Committee will review the package to ensure that it is complete and that adequate consultation and review have taken place. It may return the package to the development and review team if significant elements (as enumerated in III.B) are missing for revisions. Reasons for returning the package may include, but are not limited to:

• Insufficient consultation with other SAA subgroups, outside organizations, and experts;
• Lack of consultation with the Diversity Committee and the Accessibility and Disability Section; 
• Not showing enough consideration of current literature and reports related to the standard;
• Insufficient or inaccessible community-wide communication and feedback.

This process ideally occurs no more than once, but may occur more than once if needed. 

IV.B. Publication of revised draft standard/Notice of project completion

IV.B.1. Publication of revised draft standard.

Based on the substance of the revisions, the potential breadth of impact, and any apparent remaining substantive conflicts on content, the Standards Committee may determine that the entire revised text should be published via an appropriate medium in order to ensure the broadest possible participation in and awareness of the standards development process. The Standards Committee will accept written comments on the revised draft addressed to the Standards Committee co-chairs within 30 days of publication of the revised draft or notice of the availability of the revised draft.

If additional comments received after publication of the revision indicate widespread disagreement about the revised draft within the SAA membership, the Committee may determine that the draft should be referred back to the development and review team for response. Substantive changes to the draft standard as a result of these additional comments may require publication of a new "Notice of Completion" and notification or publication of a new revised draft.

The Standards Committee may determine that issues raised in the additional comments were already addressed adequately during the development and consultation process. The Standards Committee will then publish the notice of completion and forward the package to the SAA Council.

IV B.2. Notice of project completion.

When the final draft package is deemed complete, the Standards Committee will work with SAA staff to publish a notice in the appropriate SAA communication channels announcing that the standards development project has been completed and the draft standard has been forwarded to the Council. (See IV.C.)

IV.C. Recommendation to the SAA Council

At the conclusion of the development process, the Standards Committee will send to the SAA Council a report on the process and a recommendation.

IV.C.1. Recommendation to consider adoption.

When the Standards Committee is satisfied that the development and consultation process has been completed satisfactorily it will, after publication of the notice, forward the package to the SAA Council with a recommendation that the Council consider adopting the draft document as an official standard of the Society of American Archivists.

IV.C.2. Report on "irreconcilable differences."

After reviewing all documentation, the Standards Committee may determine that disagreements raised represent substantive irreconcilable differences of views or professional positions. In this situation, the Standards Committee will forward the package to the SAA Council with an explanation of the remaining problems and, depending on the type of standard and breadth of impact, may or may not recommend that the Council consider adopting the draft as an official standard of the Society of American Archivists.

V. Promulgation, Maintenance, and Review of Adopted Standards

The Standards Committee shall ensure that the following actions are taken for each standard that is formally adopted by the SAA Council. Often the group that developed the standard will be actively involved in or have primary responsibility for these activities.

V.A. Publication of the standard

V.A.1. Full text in the SAA newsletter.

The preferred method of publication will be to publish the full text of the adopted standard in the Society’s newsletter and on the SAA website.

V.A.2. Notice of availability in newsletter.

Some standards may be too long to publish in the newsletter. For these, a notice of their approval and a summary of their contents will be published in the next SAA newsletter and/or on the SAA website, along with information about how to obtain a copy from the SAA website.

V.A.3. Added to Standards Portal webpage.

SAA staff will post all formally adopted standards on the Standards Portal webpage with the following information: 1) the name of the standard, 2) a description of the standard, 3) a link to the full text of the standard or a description of where the standard can be obtained, 4) the date on which the standard was adopted, 5) next review date of the standard, 6) information about how comments and feedback for revision can be submitted, and 7) any additional supporting documents or information.

V.B. Promotion of the standard

V.B.1. Notice to heads of allied professional organizations.

The SAA president and/or executive director will send a letter and copy of the adopted standard to all interested outside organizations to notify them of SAA's action. The Standards Committee will assist the group that developed the standard in drafting the letter and identifying which groups to contact.

V.B.2. Press release to editors of professional journals and newsletters.

The executive director will, in cooperation with the Standards Committee and development and review team, ensure that a press release is distributed to editors of allied professional journals and newsletters to announce the development and approval of the standard, providing its full text when possible.

V.B.3. Other publicity.

For standards of interest beyond professional circles, the executive director, Standards Committee, and development and review team will determine how best to publicize their approval. Working in concert with the Program and Education committees and the SAA staff, the Standards Committee will assist the subgroup in developing workshops, conference sessions, or public forums on the new standard.

V.C. Maintenance of the standard

Immediately upon adoption of an SAA standard, the following actions shall occur:

V.C.1. Component group responsible for maintenance and review assigned.

As part of the approval process, the SAA Council will assign the standard to an ongoing SAA component group for maintenance and review or create a technical subcommittee. If a new technical subcommittee is to be created, the Standards Committee co-chairs will prepare a draft charge for the subcommittee and make recommendations for its membership. In most cases, the members of the development and review team who were actively involved in the development of the standards will be included in the recommendation for membership of the technical subcommittee. The charge must then be approved by the SAA Council before the vice president / president-elect appoints the chair(s) and members of the subcommittee.

V.C.2. Review cycle set.

All adopted SAA standards will be either assigned a review cycle of no more than five years, with a formal review commencing no later than three years following adoption or reaffirmation (section V.D.), or approved for ongoing review (section V.E.). However, in both situations, comments and revisions to the standard and proposals to revise adopted standards may be submitted at any time. At the end of an assigned review cycle, the SAA Council will be asked to reaffirm, agree to revise, or rescind the standard.

V.C.3. Monitoring and promulgating use begins.

The maintaining component group will be responsible for promoting the proper and effective use of the standard and will regularly obtain comments and feedback on the standard for future review and revision.

V.D. Cyclical review of the standard

At least two years before the review cycle expires, the Standards Committee will notify the maintaining component group that it should initiate a formal review of the content and use of the standard. The following actions shall be taken:

V.D.1. Review plan prepared.

In consultation with the Standards Committee, the component group will prepare a plan that will ensure consensus using the same kinds of broadly based consultation and review that occurred when the standard was originally developed. The plan may include:

• Other SAA subgroups and interested organizations outside of SAA that the component group plans to consult;
• Proposed joint meetings with some of these subgroups and/or organizations to discuss proposed revisions;
• Proposed public hearings at the SAA Annual Meeting;
• Proposed publications, websites, or other communication media via which comments and proposed revisions will be submitted and be made publicly available; and
• Financial resources needed for review, such as travel or editorial support.

V.D.2. Standards Committee and SAA Council review plan.

The component group will submit the plan to the Standards Committee, at which point the Standards Committee will decide whether the review process is adequate. If significant financial resources are required for review, the Standards Committee will forward the plan to the SAA Council with a recommendation for funding.

V.D.3. Recommendation to revise, reaffirm, or rescind the standard.

Once the review plan has been approved, the technical subcommittee will commence the formal review. When adequate consultation has taken place, the technical subcommittee will recommend one of the following:

Once the review plan has been approved, the component group will commence the formal review. When adequate consultation has taken place, the technical subcommittee will recommend one of the following:

• Revise the standard: Revision will be necessary if substantial changes to the standard are required.
• Reaffirm the standard: The component group may decide that a standard does not need revision at this time if comments are relatively minor and the standard is still current and widely used. The component group may also delay revision while awaiting the development or revision of another standard or project that may affect the standard under review.
• Rescind the standard: The component group may recommend rescinding the standard if the standard is no longer relevant or another standard has replaced it.

V.D.4. Recommendation to the SAA Council

The maintaining component group will submit a package to the Standards Committee containing its recommendation to reaffirm, revise, or rescind the standard along with documentation about the review process (as in III.). If the component group recommends revision, the group will also submit a completed proposal form (as in I.A.2.).

V.D.5. The Standards Committee will review the package to ensure that the review plan was adequate. Assuming that no procedural questions remain unresolved, it will forward the package to the Council with the recommendation to reaffirm, revise, or rescind.

V.D.6. The SAA Council votes on whether to reaffirm, revise, or rescind the standard.

If the Council votes to revise the standard, the component group will continue the revision work. Once the revision has been completed, the component group will follow the same process for submission and approval of a new standard, as outlined in sections III.B. and later.

If the Council reaffirms the standard, a new review cycle will be set, which may be shorter than five years. A new component group may be appointed, if necessary. The component group and the Standards Committee will inform all relevant parties that the standard has been reaffirmed and does not require revision at this time.

Should the Council vote to rescind the standard, the component group and the Standards Committee will inform all relevant parties that the standard has been rescinded. The Standards Committee will then either remove the standard from the standards webpage or mark the standard as "rescinded."

V.D.7. Notice and publication of reaffirmed, revised, or rescinded standards.

An information dissemination process similar to that outlined under V.A. and V.B. for new standards will be followed to ensure broad awareness of SAA actions concerning reaffirmed, revised, and rescinded standards.

V.E. Ongoing review of the standard.

Proposed revisions to a standard approved for ongoing review are reviewed and addressed as they are received by the assigned component group. Ongoing review is particularly conducive to standards that are electronically published and thus easy to update. Major or minor proposed changes can be submitted at any time. 

In order to respond adequately and in a timely manner to proposals for change, the following actions should be taken:

V.E.1. Proposal for changes received.

Proposals may be submitted by SAA component groups (i.e., sections, committees, task forces, or working groups), by interested external organizations (e.g., the Rare Books and Manuscripts Section), or by individuals, or may be generated by the technical subcommittee itself. Proposals should include the following elements:

• Name of the sponsoring group;
• Identification of the component of the standard to be changed;
• Brief description of the proposed change, and justification;

All proposals should be submitted to the component group responsible for the maintenance of the standard.

V.E.2. Component group reviews proposals.

 Upon receiving a proposal, the component group responsible shall:

 Conduct a preliminary review of the proposed change request to ensure that it is complete. Incomplete proposals will be returned to the submitting body. If there are no missing elements to the documentation, the component group will acknowledge receipt to the proposer.

 Evaluate if the proposed change should be considered a major or minor change.[1]

• A minor change is one that does not affect the application or interpretation of the standard and would not result in a user’s current application of the standard being non-compliant. Examples may include:
  • Updating links in an appendix or standard
  • Updating crosswalks based on changes to adjacent/companion standards
  • Making typographical or grammatical corrections
  • Bug fixes
  • Patches
  • Making suggestions for use/providing use case examples
• A major change[2] is one significant enough that it needs or would benefit from community and expert feedback. A general rule of thumb is that the change alters the application or interpretation of the standard either to the point of making the previously compliant use of the standard suddenly non-compliant or significantly altering the way in which the standard is implemented or taught. Examples may include:
  • Adding a new element (required or optional)
  • Deleting a required element
  • Making significant alterations to how an element is used (going from required to optional or optional to required) or how an element is defined to the point at which it would affect practical use
  • Creating a new appendix
  • Significant revision to preambles, principles, appendices
• Distribute copies of the proposal to the other members of the component group for their review and comment.
• Determine the extent to which the proposal should be distributed for public comment. The Standards Committee expects that groups will incorporate diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility principles. Aspects that could be addressed include, but are not limited to:
  • Consideration for/consultation with/involvement of multiple types of institutions (e.g., academic, corporate, government, religious etc.).
  • Consideration for/consultation with institutions in multiple geographic regions.
  • Consideration for/involvement of persons at multiple career points (e.g., mid-career, student, retired, paraprofessional, temporary, etc.), researchers, and persons in allied fields.
  • Consideration for/consultation with people with disabilities, multiple gender identities, multiple sexual orientations, multiple racial/ethnic identities or nationalities, multiple religious backgrounds, and diverse economic status.
  • Positionality statements reflecting on the unique identities of the committee members in relation to the standard.
• Identify and add to the proposal:
  • Expected effect/impact on individuals, institutions, and supporting systems;
  • Known related standards affected by the proposed change.

 [1] These definitions were inspired by Semantic Versioning, but do not completely align with the versioning guidelines put forth by it.

[2] In this context, a major change is a single significant change to the standard. This is distinct from a major revision, which is a revision to the standard as a whole or several major changes. Major revision requires utilizing the cyclical revision procedures (see V.E.7 for major revisions to continuous revision standards).

V.E.3. Consultation with other SAA subgroups and external organizations.

For proposals classified as major changes, external groups, particularly those directly impacted by a proposal, must be consulted during the review process. This should include informing the Standards Committee co-chairs of the proposal submission. Consultation should be pursued through several means, which may include:

• Publication of the proposal on the group's SAA microsite.
• Letters sent to heads of organizations or organizations, or to individuals, inside and outside of SAA, known to have an interest in the standard under revision, inviting their comments on a particular proposal.
• Publication of notices in the newsletters or on the websites of these organizations about the proposed change.
• Publication of the proposal in appropriate SAA media.
• Publication of the proposal in external publications.
• Joint meetings with interested organizations to discuss the proposal.
• Open forums or hearings at the SAA Annual Meeting.

For proposals classified as minor changes, consultation with external groups is optional.

V.E.4. Recommendation to revise the standard.

Based on comments received from the community, the component group may either reject the proposal, or develop a recommendation for changes to the standard. The draft changes may be based on both the original proposal and amendments developed during the review process. Change proposals should document changes in the standard in relation to the current text. Significant changes in the initial proposal by the component group may require an additional period of consultation. The review and consultation process should be completed within six months of the submission of a proposal.

For major changes, once the draft changes have been finalized, the proposal packet should be forwarded to the Standards Committee together with documentation of the submission and consultation process. For minor changes, complete and submit to the Standards Committee the Minor Changes Form.

V.E.5. Standards Committee review of recommended changes.

For proposals submitted as major changes, the Standards Committee will review the package to ensure that it is complete and that adequate consultation and review have taken place. It may return the package to the component group if significant elements are missing.

For proposals submitted as minor changes, the Standards Committee will review the package to ensure it is complete and meets the qualifications for a minor change. It may return the package to the component group if significant elements are missing or if it identifies the change as constituting a major change, in which case the component group must follow procedures for revising a major change.

The SAA Council authorizes the Standards Committee to accept minor changes to official standards of the Society of American Archivists. Decisions must be reported in a timely manner to the SAA Council, which reserves the right to roll back the change.

V.E.6. Recommendation to the SAA Council.

For proposed major changes, the Standards Committee will send to the SAA Council a report on the process and a recommendation. This may be either a recommendation to consider implementation of the draft changes, or a recommendation against adoption. The decision to accept changes to official standards of the Society of American Archivists can only be made by the SAA Council.

When the draft changes documentation is deemed complete, the Standards Committee will publish a notice in the appropriate SAA media announcing that the draft changes have been forwarded to the Council.

V.E.6. Promulgation of revised standard.

If a major draft change is accepted by the SAA Council, or a minor change is accepted by the Standards Committee, the Standards Committee will publish a notice of the approval of the changes in the appropriate SAA media.

V.E.7. Major revisions or rescinding the standard.

In addition to managing proposals for revision, the component group may also determine that the standard is no longer relevant or has been superseded, and may recommend that the standard be considered for major revisions or rescinded. The guidelines for cyclical review should be followed in developing such recommendations (see section V.D.). The SAA Council may also establish a deadline for reviewing the applicability and maintenance of standards at their discretion.

VI. Council Fast-Track Procedures

In some cases the SAA Council may initiate, or encourage/approve a component group to initiate, the standards development process for best practices documents without seeking prior approval from the Standards Committee.  In these cases a subgroup of the Council functions as the standard development and review team and the standards approval process begins at step III as described above.

SAA Expert Groups (as identified by the Council) may also create best practice and/or guidelines that support the mission of the Society and its members. In these cases the Expert Group functions as the standards development and review team and the standards approval process begins at Step III. The Expert Group will notify the Standards Committee co-chairs when they begin a revision process.

Revised June 1995, February 2010, January 2012, August 2013, May 2014, July 2016, January 2021, June 2024.

Standards Creation/Revision Outline

This outline is designed to help Society of American Archivists (SAA) sections or groups who are sponsoring the creation of a new standard or the revision of an existing standard. This is not a substitute for the Procedures for Review and Approval of an SAA-Developed Standard, but it is designed to help navigate the process. References to the Procedures are included throughout the list, for more detailed information with the section and subsection number (ex: I.A. or III.C.1)

Please note: This outline is not for the Procedures for SAA Endorsement of an External Standard. That is a different (and slightly shorter) process designed for SAA approval of standards created or revised by external groups, task forces with representation from multiple organizations, or other non-SAA developed documentation.

Proposing a Creation/Revision

1. The proposing group(s) (which must be an official SAA group) must complete the proposal for standards development (I.A.)

  a. Note: Occasionally, creation or revision may begin with a different workflow, under the auspices of SAA Council. “Fast-tracked procedures” (VI) may be initiated by Council, but are still subject to review by Standards Committee, beginning with Section III of the Procedures and should follow the outline below starting at step 3.

2. Standards Committee reviews the proposal and may be in communication with the proposing group(s) for additional details (II.A)

3. Standards Committee recommends for Council to approve creation/revision process and forwards it to Council according to their meeting schedule/deadline for agenda items.

Do the Hard Work

4. Once Council has agreed that a proposal is approved for creation/revision, the Standards Development Process (III) begins. The group appointed to do the creation/revision will:

a. Consult with SAA groups and external organizations (III.A). This process should be documented for the submission packet later.

b. Draft the new or revised standard and supporting documentation (III.B) OR submit a notice of project abandonment (III.C).

c. Submit the packet (draft and supporting documentation) to Standards.

Standards Committee Review and Recommendation

5. Standards Committee reviews the submission packet and may be in communication with the group leading the creation/revision for additional details or information (IV.A).

6. Once the packet is complete, Standards Committee will make a recommendation and forward it to Council according to their meeting schedule/deadline for agenda items.

Council Approval

7. Once the packet has been recommended to Council for approval of the creation/revision and Council has agreed, the group leading the creation/revision:

a. Will work with the Standards Committee and SAA Webmaster to add or update the standard on the Standards Portal (V.A.3).

b. Will assist in developing information to release through different channels to share the new or revised standard (V.B)

c. May participate in managing the revision cycle or ongoing maintenance (depending on how the standard is managed) (V.C.2). Details on cyclical review (V.D) and on-going review (V.E.) are part of the procedures.

You're Done!

8. Celebrate your success!

Continuous Revision Note

Some standards are on a continuous revision cycle and major and minor changes may be proposed at any time without a full revision proposal.

1. Technical subcommittees responsible for standards under continuous revision may submit a minor change to the Standards Committee as per Section V.E.2 using the minor change request form. Minor changes are approved by the Standards Committee and submitted to Council for notification at the end of each year, as part of the annual report.

2. The technical subcommittees responsible for standards under continuous revision may submit a major change to one or more parts of the standard following the guidance in Section V.D.

V.2 reviewed and approved by the Standards Committee, October 2023

Procedures for SAA Endorsement of an External Standard

Proposals must be submitted by official groups within the SAA. Individuals who are interested in submitting a proposal for the endorsement of an external standard may consult with the Standards Committee on appropriate groups to which they may wish to submit a proposal.

I. Submission of a Proposal to Endorse an External Standard

I.A. The proposing group shall:

Complete and submit the PROPOSAL FOR ENDORSEMENT OF AN EXTERNAL STANDARD form. The form shall include:

• Name of the standard;
• Brief summary of the standard;
• Sponsoring organization;
• Location of the standard (website link, publication details, etc.);
• Effect/impact of the standard on archival practice;
• A discussion of how the standard is being used in the archives profession (Who is using it? How is it being used? Is it widely used?);
• Review and revision procedures of the standard (Who reviews the standard? How often is the standard reviewed? Is the review process open?); and
• Known existing standards that are closely related to or affected by the standard being proposed for endorsement.

I.B. The Standards Committee co-chairs shall:

I.B.1. Acknowledge receipt of the ENDORSEMENT PROPOSAL FORM to the proposing body and notify the Standards Committee of the proposal submission.

I.B.2. Distribute copies of the ENDORSEMENT PROPOSAL FORM to the other members of the Standards Committee, including the subgroup chairs and the SAA Council liaison. Subgroup chairs may distribute the proposal to their technical subcommittee or development and review team for comment.

I.B.3. Collect comments and suggestions from members of the Standards Committee and other subgroups to which the proposal was distributed.

I.B.4. If comments warrant further discussion, arrange for a discussion to determine whether there is a consensus to endorse the standard.

II. Standards Committee Action in Response to Proposal

The Standards Committee will take a formal vote in response to the proposal, and will take one of the following actions in response to a proposal, as appropriate:

II.A. Return for revision.

The Standards Committee will return to the submitting group a proposal form that is incomplete or that requires revision and request that it be revised and resubmitted.

II.B. Decline.

The Standards Committee may decline the endorsement of an external standard because: 1) the external standard is in direct conflict with an SAA-adopted standard or policy; 2) there is insufficient demand or potential benefit to SAA members; 3) the standard is not widely adopted or used in the archives field; or 4) the review process does not allow for SAA contribution or comment.

II.C. Endorse.

If the Standards Committee agrees that the external standard has benefit to the SAA community, it will recommend the standard to the SAA Council for endorsement. If the SAA Council endorses the standard, the Standards Committee will then take the following actions:

1. Publish the full standard or link to the standard on the Standards Portal webpage along with the endorsement proposal.
2. Notify the SAA community about the endorsement through appropriate SAA media.

 

Adopted by the SAA Council: February 2010, January 2012

Subcommittees of the Standards Committee