Form PM3 ( Interim Report2:

		FORMAT OF PROGRESS REPORT
(To be submitted by Grantee with each grant drawdown application, or at intervals no greater than 3 months)
Form PM3(Part 2-Capital)
Project Title:	Scottish Archive Network			Project Ref No:	DG-95-05231
Name of Grantee:	Scottish Archive Network
As stated in the Monitoring Documents referred to in your Grant Contract, you are required to submit to NHMF a Progress Report with each grant drawdown application, or at maximum intervals of 3 months in the absence of an application, reporting on how the project is progressing towards meeting the Approved Purposes. The headings and format of the Report, addressing the principal monitoring criteria, are shown below. These headings and format must be followed, but you may prepare your Report using computer software incorporating spreadsheets as appropriate. All sections (expanded in size as necessary) are to be completed fully on each monthly report. (Use supplementary sheets if necessary). PM forms should be returned in hardcopy and must be completed fully. Failure to do so will delay processing your Grant
Report No:	16		Report Date:			18 July 2000
			Covering Period:			June 2000

1. General Progress/ Programme and Project Objectives

Enter summary report on general progress towards achievement of the Approved Purposes identifying any problems or issues to which NHMF’s attention should be drawn. Note any actions proposed in response to problems or particular areas of risk.

The project is within budget and is scheduled to be completed on time.

See annex 1 for detailed progress and throughput reports.

See annex 2 for minutes of participating archives working group

See annex 3 for report on User Group meeting

2. Partnership Funding

Enter progress towards securing partnership funds

Source of Funding	Amount expected (A)	Amount received to date (B)	Balance to come A-B)	Date balance expected
NAS	£425,967	£48,400	£377’567	Aug 2002
GSU	£703,785	£34,938	£668,847	Aug 2002
	1,129,752	83’338	1,046,414	Aug 2002
Totals

Explain any changes to sources of Partnership Funding since the last Progress Report

3. Change Control

Enter requests for any material change to the Approved Purposes which have been approved by NHMF since the last Report and advise of any potential requests for such change in the future.

Description of Change Item	Date of request to NHMF	Date of NHMF response	Effect on achievement of Approved Purposes	Effect on Programme	Effect on Costs
Change 2nd digital imaging post at present allotted to Special Archive Services sub project (Grade B1) to extra curatorial post within TLFA sub project ( Grade B1) i.e no change in finance just change of staff within sub projects	18 July 2000

Note: NHMF Approval is required for any material change to the Approved Purposes

Report on any effect to delivery of the Approved Purposes of any cost transfer between the principal cost elements stated in your “Notification of Grant”. (Note: no such transfer is to be made between capital and revenue elements, or between VAT and any other cost element, without NHMF prior consent ).

Amount of cost transfer (£’000)

Cost transfer from (cost element):

Cost transfer to (cost element):

Effect on delivery of Approved Purposes

4. Review of Design Drawings and Documentation

Enter any design reviews or comments received from NHMF or its Project Monitors since your last report

Work element for which Design/Document review has been carried out	Date reviewed	NHMF/Project Monitor’s comments (if any)
N/A

5. Timetable/Programme

Enter progress compared with the agreed Timetable/Programme for key activities

Grant Expiry Date:

Key Activity or milestone	Planned completion date	Actual (or currently forecast) completion date	Variance	Comment
These are all to be reviewed 8 and 9 August and will be included in next month’s report. .
The project remains on time.
Overall Project Completion

6. Expenditure on Approved Costs

a) Cost Control

Enter expenditure to date against the key items of Approved Cost (i.e. the costs on which NHMF has agreed to pay the Payment Percentage) compared with that detailed in the pre-commencement documentation. (VAT and Contingencies to be separately identified).

Items of Approved Cost (Principal cost elements)	Approved Costs to completion as agreed at award	Out-turn Costs as currently forecast (A)	Planned costs to date - as submitted with Form PM1 (B)	Actual costs to Date (C)	Variance (C-B)	Balance of costs (A- C)
Staff	£2,170,889	£493,654	£493,654	£339,916	£-153,738	£153,738
Internet Server	£449,700	£374,750	£374,750		£374,750	£374,750
Communication	£51,222	£17,185	£17,185	£1,845	£-15,340	£15,340
Digitisation	£349,191	£180,000	£180,000	£65,725	£-114,275	£114,275
Other	£543,500	£204,050	£204,050	£79,407	£-124,643	£124,643
Contingency	£2,631,805	£63,483	£63,483		£63,483	£63,483
VAT	N/A
Totals	£6,196,307	£1,333,122	£1,333,122	£486,893	£30,237	£846,229

Note any significant changes to the apportionment of costs between the principal cost elements prior to their commitment. Note the effect of any such changes and confirm that they will not affect the Approved Purposes including expected quality.

Cost transfer from :	Cost transfer to:	Amount (£)	Effect of Transfer
N/A

b) Cash Flow

Enter the expected timing of expenditure of the total Balance (A-C) calculated above and the funding sources to cover the expenditure

	To date	Next Qtr	2^nd Qtr	3^rd Qtr	4^th Qtr	5^th Qtr	Later	Total to Completion
Expenditure of Approved Cost	Enter Total of C above							Enter Total of A above
Funded by:
NHMF	£486,893	£232,000						£1,333,122
Other source (1)
Other source (2)
Other source (3)
Total Funding (to equal Expenditure of Approved Cost)	£486,893	£232,000						£1,333,122

7. Procurement

Enter the current procurement status of any significant goods, works, or services currently being procured for the project, or awarded since the last Report.

Goods/Works/ Services : brief description	Approx Value	EU procurement Applies? Yes./No	No of tenderers	Date of tender return	Date of award	Selected Contractor/supplier/ consultant
ICT Equipment	£170,000	Yes	2	26/04	12/06	Morse Group Ltd
Digital Cameras	£30,000	Yes	1	16/06	03/07	Edit Ltd
Bookcradles & Assoc Eqp	£32,000	Yes	2	16/06	06/07	IKM

Identify any goods/works/services not awarded to the lowest tenderer and provide reasons why the selected supplier/consultant/contractor offered best value for money.

8. Property Ownership and Possession

Note any evidence provided at the request of NHMF or the Project Monitor.

Property Description and evidence provided	Date evidence provided to NHMF
N/A

9. Insurance

Enter the insurances you have effected:

Cover	Effective From Date	Expiry Date
Employer Liability Insurance	21/10/99	20/10/00
Computer Insurance	21/10/99	21/10/00
Office Insurance: Including Goods In Transit & Officers Liability Insurance.	21/10/99	21/10/00

10. Appointment of Staff (Revenue Elements only, if any)

List the salaried staff appointed (applicable to “Revenue” elements of project only) since your last Report and the total number of volunteers currently employed (if any).

a) Salaried Staff (Note: applicable only to staff whose salaries are included as Eligible Costs in the Approved project.

Position	Date Appointed	Job Description sent to NHMF (Yes/No)	Media in which advert placed	Employment Contract to NHMF (Yes/No)
N/A

b) Volunteer Staff

The total number of Volunteer staff employed at present is …………4…… (Details are provided with PM3 (Part1)

11. Statutory Consents

Enter the status of the principal statutory consents required to complete the project

Consent Required	Granting Authority	Actual or expected date of consent
Planning	N/A
Listed Building
Scheduled Monument
Others

12. Publicity and Grant Acknowledgement

Enter displayed acknowledgement, press releases, or other publicity issued since the last report:

Description	Date Issued	Approved by NHMF (Yes/No)
Displayed acknowledgement	N/A
Press Releases issued
Publicity issued

13. Photographic Records

Confirm that you are making photographic records of the project Y

14. Special Conditions

Indicate progress towards satisfying the Special Conditions (if any) noted in the Contract:

No	Special Condition	Target Date for compliance	Current Status
	Reporting format to be clarified at next monitoring meeting

Name of Grantee: Scottish Archive Network

Address: Thomas Thomson House, 99 Bankhead Crossway North, Edinburgh, EH11 4DX

Signed for Grantee: …Ishbel Barnes……………………………………………………..

Date: …………19/7/00……………….

Report to Heritage Lottery Fund

Annex 1

Progress

Top Level Finding Aids Project

An informal visit was paid to Glasgow School of Art archives on 8 June. No TLFA creation work will occur there in the immediate future. The archivist is still in the process of sorting out what collections are held there, and because of pressures on SCAN time there seemed little need to progress work there in the near future.

The quality check of the Scottish Jewish Archive Centre TLFA was completed, and the TLFA sent off to the contact there, who signified his approval of what had been done. About half of the TLFA for the Falkirk Museums History Research Centre was also dispatched to the archivist, and comments were still awaited at the end of the month. 400 TLFA entries were sent off to the archivist on Angus Council Archives for consideration but she turned out to be on sick leave, so no further progress has been made there.

TLFA creation continued on West Lothian Council Archives, Aberdeen University Special Collections Dept and Jordanhill College Library TLFAs. Adjustments were made to the Lothian Health Services TLFA in the light of extensive discussions held with its staff, who have undertaken much of the work there.

All of the staff had leave for some part of the month; and John MacKenzie left the staff of the project on Friday 16 June, having been one of the first two archivist recruits in October 1999. Because it will not be possible to fill his post immediately, there will be a spell of some weeks while the project cannot proceed as swiftly as expected. The performance measures for the next month or two will be adjusted to take account of the shortfall.

Special Archive Services Project

Joanna Baird developed a micro-site specifically for the ‘News Roundup’ that could be accessed via the Internet. This will allows users to access text and images as well as back issues and complementary information. This will avoid the necessity of sending out lengthy attachments and can ‘live’ on the Internet until the fully-designed version is available. Joanna Baird also added a basic virtual tour for Orkney Council Archives.

Joanna Baird drafted a list of requirements for improving the current digital camera set-up for Special Archive Services and these were added to the tender specification prepared by Hazel Anderson of the Testaments Project. Joanna has been involved in the recruitment process for the post of digital imaging technician for Special Archive Services. This included assessment of the application received, a brief training session on interviewing techniques and questions and then an Interview Board and a post-interview assessment. The candidate interviewed was successful in gaining the post. A starting date has yet to be agreed with the successful candidate’s line manager.

Robin Urquhart visited Dumfries & Galloway Council Archives on Wednesday 7 June to demonstrate the prototype and Knowledge Base and to gather information for further Knowledge Base entries and the exhibition on Herbal Remedies. He also visited the Scottish Film and Television Archive, to view films of the Highland Railway for potential inclusion in our on-line exhibition. Robin has continued work on the Knowledge Base; entering amendments to a wide range of existing topics suggested by participating archives, and compiling answers to FAQs on topics as diverse as ‘Transportation’, ‘Vehicle Licensing registers’, and ‘The Battle of Dunbar’.

Testaments Project

The second procurement specification for cameras and related equipment was sent out to tender on 7 June, with a closure date of 15 June. As a result, one tender was submitted for cameras and related hardware and two were submitted for copystands and book cradles.

Jane Hill completed her checking and numbering of the Aberdeen warrants (CC1/6/1-86) one month ahead of schedule on 19 June.

As a result of the checks carried out by Hazel Anderson and Margaret Fox on the testaments indexes re-keyed by ADS the company decided to do much of the work again. By the end of the month, these re-captured files were being returned and were found to be greatly improved.

Hazel Anderson was a member of the interview board for the Special Archive Services digital imaging technician post. She also arranged the programme for a half day visit to SCAN by Ahmet Killic, an archivist from the historical archives of the Turkish Empire in Istanbul.

Peter Dickson and Dagmar Hinz attended the Society of Archivists annual conference and conservation training event in Manchester in the last week of the month. At the trade fair they were able to evaluate one of the book cradles submitted in the second stage of tendering (see above). Peter wrote a report on the evaluation.

An advertisement for the third conservator post was placed in the Society of Archivists Newsletter.

Our GSU volunteers continued their useful work of indexing and paginating testaments registers. This included re-keying indexes for Perth and Fife and starting a check against the original volumes. So far, the check has shown up a significant number of missing entries and errors.

During the month, Peter Dickson undertook in-house training on presentation and public speaking, and Hazel Anderson attended a fire safety training session held at TTH.

Throughput Reports

Special Archive Services

	June 2000 Predicted	June 2000 Achieved	July 2000 Predicted	Cumulative totals
Topic Pages – drafted	3	6	6	29
Frequently Asked Questions - drafted	4	0	4	84
Topic Pages - quality-controlled	2	2	5	15
Frequently Asked Questions - quality-controlled	4	4	0	41

The topic pages compiled were ‘places’ entries (one on Renfrewshire county and five entries on burghs). In addition, five new contents pages for the Knowledge Base were created.

TLFAs

	June 2000- Predicted	June 2000 - Achieved	July 2000 - Predicted	Totals achieved
TLFA initial draft entries –drafted	350	310	250	2940
TLFA initial draft entries - quality controlled	150	150	200	1170
TLFA entries - revised within SCAN	150	180	150	560
TLFA entries – agreed by SCAN and part. archive	50	95	200	95

Testaments

Testaments Editorial	June 2000 Predicted	June 2000 Achieved	July 2000 Predicted
Warrants (CC1/6)
Folders checked	4 (83-86) Completed	4 (83-86) Completed	Completed
Pages numbered	2000	469 (p. 24075)
Testaments registers SC1/37/18-43, SC49/31/1-25, SC11/38/1-8 & 41/1
Index entries created	9000	16084	9000
Vols/Pages numbered	40/43000	38/40465	20/22000

Testaments Conservation	June 2000 Predicted	June 2000 Achieved	July 2000 Predicted
Vols. assessed	30 (CC8/8/81-110)	0	30 (CC8/8/81-110)
Folios cleaned	2500	5049	2500
Vols. paginated	10	2	10
Folios conserved	500	20	500
Vols.rebound	0	0	0
Vols. completed	10	13	10

Annex 2

Meeting of The Scottish Archive Network

Participating Archives Working Group

Thomas Thomson House, Edinburgh

Tuesday 30 May 2000 at 10.00am

Attendees: Dr. I. O’Brien (Chair); Dr. M. Barfoot; Miss J. Cripps; Mrs C. Whatley; Mrs I. Geddes; Dr. D. Brown; Dr J. Barnes; Mr S. Low (Minute-Secretary)

1. Role of Group & Scope of Responsibilities

1.1 Dr O’Brien welcomed everyone to the first meeting of the Participating Archive Working Group.

1.2 Dr Barnes described the background to the project and suggested that the Working Group might wish to identify the specific areas of the project it would like to develop further.

1.3 Dr O’Brien stressed the importance of feeding back, to the wider network of participating archives, any information or issues discussed within the Working Group.

1.4 Dr Barnes intimated that the URL of the SCAN web site would be made available to all of the participating archives within the next few weeks.

Action: IB

1.5 Dr Barnes suggested and it was agreed, that the minutes of this meeting should be disseminated through the weekly Newsletter to all participating archives.

Action:SL

1.6 Dr Barnes suggested that it might be appropriate for a joint meeting to be convened between the Working Group and the newly appointed User Group, to share information and ideas.

Action: IB

1.7 Dr O’Brien clarified the right of the Working Group to access to the Board of Directors, if required, and suggested that it might be useful, from a good communications perspective, to arrange a liaison meeting with them.

Action: IB

2. Communication Strategy

2.1 Newsletter

2.1.1 The group felt that there was insufficient substantial news to justify a weekly newsletter. They also preferred a more formal tone. Dr Barnes explained that the Newsletter had been produced initially for staff in the NAS, at the request of the Keeper. It had been considered useful to extend its circulation to the participating archives and other interested parties to keep them up to date with project developments.

2.1.2 Dr Brown suggested that the Working Group might wish to make representation to the Keeper regarding a reduction in the frequency of the Newsletter. Dr Barfoot suggested that a two-week format with more content might be more viable.

2.1.3 Dr Brown suggested that it might be useful to incorporate a ‘Letters to the Editor Feature’. Dr Barnes explained that she was very keen that the communication was two-way and that SCAN would be very grateful for any letters. They were already very pleased that so many participating archives contributed to the “Document of the Week” section. Dr Barnes explained that these documents would be used in the longer term on the website.

2.1.4 Mrs Whatley and Miss Cripps queried whether in its current format the Newsletter was an acceptable tool for communications between participating archives. Dr Barnes said that communication between archives was very important to SCAN. She added that the aim of SCAN was to open up the contents of Scottish archives to the Scottish people and in so doing to raise the profile of Scottish archives. The Newsletter was therefore somewhat peripheral to its main aims and was only one interim means of communication. SCAN also communicated separately with individual archives and in general with the participating archive meetings. She added that communication would become much simpler once the website was operating in November. She further added that she had had a lot of positive feedback about the Newsletter which she hoped would remain fairly informal but was very happy to accept that this group wished to be more formal.

2.1.4 It was suggested that the participating archives be canvassed for their views on what they would like to see included in the Newsletter. Dr Brown suggested that participating archives could be asked to contribute their views on SCAN visits. Dr O’Brien suggested that the Working Group could be seen to take the initiative here and produce an article for inclusion in the Newsletter. Dr Barfoot proposed a joint archive approach to writing an article on SCAN visits, using the Health sector as an example. Dr O’Brien suggested that that this might be an approach, which other sectors could follow. Dr Barnes said that she was very grateful for such a positive suggestion from Dr Barfoot.

Action: MB

2.1.5 It was agreed that Dr Borthwick’s draft timetable of archive visits could be published in the Newsletter. Dr Barnes agreed to arrange with this with Dr Borthwick

Action: IB

.

2.2 IT Equipment

2.2.1 Dr Barnes confirmed that all archives would receive any IT equipment required on a phased strategy from now until the end of the project. Dr Barnes also confirmed that Mr Paton from SCAN’s IT team would deliver on-site IT training where required.

2.2.2 Dr Barnes confirmed that links to other participating archive websites would become active from the launch date and that she hoped the web site should become the primary focus for future communications with the participating archives.

3. Training

3.1 Dr O’Brien emphasised the need for further professional training on standards, e.g. ISAD (G) and EAD. Dr Barfoot emphasised that any training offered needed to be balanced and specifically targeted at the right people. Dr Barnes agreed that Standards Training Days could be organised on a staggered basis. It was agreed that the main focus should be on ISAD (G) and Name Authority Files.

Action: IB

3.2 It was agreed to include a list of available training options in a future edition of the Newsletter Action: IB

3.3 Dr Barfoot suggested that each working group member should canvass their own sectors to establish initial training needs and bring the results to the next meeting for analysis. It was agreed that on-going training needs could be also be established through the programme of SCAN visits.

Action: All

4. Top Level Finding Aids

4.1 Mrs Whatley suggested that SCAN needed to provide guidance on the way in which ISAD (G) standards were interpreted. Dr Barnes agreed and said that Dr Borthwick and his team would be doing this. The group felt that November would be too late and that that Dr Borthwick should be asked to post interim guidelines on the web site regarding interpretation of ISAD(G) standards as a matter of urgency . An open forum session to be co-ordinated into which responses could be fed. Dr Barfoot emphasised that this should be presented as an opportunity for the participating archives to engage with SCAN on this important matter.

Action: IB

4.2 Dr Barnes reported that the web site would help to clarify the issue of Name Authority Files by showing how it would work in practice. It was also suggested that feedback on this issue could be gathered through the web site

4.3 Mrs Whatley expressed her concern about SCAN’s ability to convert all the SUSCAG collections to ISAD(G) TFLA format within the project timescale. Mrs Geddes reported that extensive collections held by the NLS had been successfully converted within quite a tight time frame and that they were happy with the results.

4.5 Dr Barfoot raised his concerns about the difficulties associated with maintaining standardisation between the TLFA’s of different institutions with subsequent later additions and ammendments. Dr Barnes agreed that this was a problem but suggested that this issue was out with the current scope of the project and would have to be investigated independently at some point in the future.

4.6 Dr Barnes confirmed that SCAN would be creating Name Authority Files for record creators only. Mrs Whatley suggested that this might be an issue on which comments should be sought. Dr Barnes explained that SCAN had taken this decision on purely pragmatic grounds; the constraints of time and finance imposed by SCAN being a finite three year project.

5. Special Archive Services

5.1 Dr Barnes confirmed that once the web site was available all participating archives would have access to the Knowledge Base of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ). It was also confirmed that all participating archives would be able to contribute their own FAQ’s etc to the knowledge base and that they should liase with Mr Urquhart in the SAS team regarding potential contributions. It was noted that SCAN FAQ’s were quality assured by a third party and that this may be an approach which other contributing archives may wish to adopt. It was agreed that this information should be included in the Newsletter.

Action: IB

6. Harmonisation with Other Projects

6.1 Mrs Whatley suggested that the Scottish HE projects could be mentioned in the Newsletter.

6.2 Dr Barfoot emphasised the importance of tying related projects to the SCAN project where possible. Dr Barnes suggested that SUSCAG might wish to identify a central point of contact. Mrs Whatley agreed to look into this.

Action: PW

6.3 Dr Barnes confirmed that contact was being maintained with the A2A project.

6.4 In response to a question raised about funding Dr O’Brien suggested including this as an agenda item at the next regional meeting of the Society of Archivists.

Action: IO

6.5 Mrs Whatley suggested that consideration might be given to holding future working group meetings in a more central location. Agreed that this issue would be explored. Action: IB

6.6 Dr Barfoot intimated that it was the intention of the Health sector group to rotate the working group representative at each meeting and enquired whether any other sector intended doing this. Dr O’Brien expressed her concern that this may have an impact on continuity.

7. SCAN Visits

7.1 Miss Cripps asked if SCAN would be able to visit all participating archives in advance of their formal project visit. Dr Barnes confirmed that this was already happening to a large extent, but also warned of the impact that these extra visits would have on the progress of the project implementation plan.

Date of next meeting: Tuesday 29 August 2000 at 10.00am - National Library of Scotland, Lawnmarket Building, High Street, Edinburgh.

Agenda Items to Stuart Low by Tuesday 15 August 2000. ([email protected])

SL 02/06/00

Annex 3

Chairman’s Report on the Inaugural Meeting of the Scottish

Archives Network Users Group,

Thomas Thomson House, 19 Bankhead

Crossway North, Edinburgh, Saturday 20 May 2000

Introduction:

Since the inception of the Scottish Archive Network, efforts had been

made by the chairman of the planned Users Group and by Scottish

Archive Network (SCAN) staff to appeal for interested members of the public to volunteer to join the group and to ask organisations and societies with an interest in the network to identify representatives to serve on it. A list of current User Group Members is attached for information.

Attendance:

SCAN was represented at the meeting by:

• Ishbel Barnes George Mackenzie
• Hazel Anderson Alan Borthwick
• Joanna Baird Peter Dickson
• Robin Urquhart Rachael Third
• Jane Hill Margaret Fox
• Bill Paton Niall Taylor
• Stuart Low

Members of the Users Group who attended were:

• Chris McCluskey - (University of Edinburgh final year student in Scottish Historical Studies)
• Jim Thomson (Headmaster of St Pauls Primary School Shettleston, Glasgow and a committee member of the Scottish Local History Forum)
• Maggie Craig (author and individual member)
• Rosemary Bigwood (researcher and member of the Scottish Records
• Association)
• Sam Henry (Principal Teacher of History at secondary school level and representative of the Scottish Association of Teachers of History)
• Iain Mackenzie (representative member from the Glasgow and West of Scotland Family History Society)
• Mrs Margaret Davidson (representative member of the Aberdeen and Northeast Scotland Family History Society)
• David McClure (Ayrshire Archaeological and Natural History Society)
• Bill Lang (individual member)
• Ann Laird (Principal Teacher of Computing and author and researcher of local history in Hyndland, Glasgow).

Apologies were received from Dr Sonja Cameron –University of Glasgow.

Format:

As this was an inaugural meeting of the Users Group, it took the form

of a series of presentations by network staff designed to bring

members up to date on the current state of the project. As the group

in attendance was of a manageable number, it was possible for

presentations to be interactive, with plenty of opportunity for

questions and comments from the audience.

The Project Strands:

Although the network is not yet 'live' on the Internet, initial design for the projected site has reached the stage that Joanna Baird was able to demonstrate many aspects of what was planned, using the software provided by Multimedia Incorporated (MMI), the website design company working with SCAN. Over the course of the day three substantial handouts were made available by Hazel Anderson on the Testaments Project, Alan Borthwick on Top Level Finding Aids and Robin Urquhart on the 'Knowledge Base' which will make information relating to many aspects of Scottish History available on the site. Robin Urquhart's handout included a comment form designed to elicit some ideas and suggestions from User Group members. All speakers from the network throughout the day also emphasised how welcome feedback from the Users Group would be to the network team, and some of the discussion throughout the day also concerned the ways in which the Users group could provide feedback and comment in a more focused way to network staff.

Tour of TTH:

Members of the Users Group were offered the opportunity to tour Thomas Thomson House to get an idea of the facilities available and the work carried out there by SCAN staff. Members of the Users Group thus not only heard about the planned work of the network but also had the opportunity to tour the premises behind the creation of the virtual archive planned for the web.

Future Strategy:

MMI are now working with SCAN to create a discussion forum that can be used by e-mail or through the initial web pages scheduled to go live in December. The more general discussion, which concluded the day's activities included the question of how the work of the Users Group could progress. The point was made that future meetings should be designed around a workshop format, where small discussion groups could be established, rather than set piece presentations, although the need for all members of the group to keep an overview of the work of the network was also accepted. It was noted that particular attention should be paid to the technical infrastructure of the project and how this may affect the type and quality of information, which could be made available through the website. It was proposed that SCAN staff could possibly meet with members of the User Group on an ad-hoc basis whilst visiting some of the participating archives around Scotland. It was also proposed that all User Group members be invited to the launch party on 30 November.

Everyone agreed that it was not necessary to always meet in Edinburgh, although there were no obvious alternative venues available in Glasgow or Stirling, both mentioned as convenient places to meet. As the network would have something published on the web by December, it was agreed that the Users Group should try to meet before then to discuss what would be available at the start, and what progress would be made in adding to the site as rapidly as possible within the constraints of available resources. It was agreed that sometime in September would be the best time to meet, with the place

and date of the meeting to be confirmed.

The future of the Users Group, including those unable to attend its first meeting through distance or pressure of work, could largely be developed through e-mail and the discussion forum MMI was developing.

It is important to conclude with a note of thanks to SCAN staff who gave up their Saturday to meet members of the Users Group and to those who organised the coffee and tea, and the buffet lunch made available to allow members of the Users Group and the network to meet each other and discuss the network more informally. Details of the next meeting will be circulated early in September, but in the meantime members of the Users Group should feel free to contact network staff by e-mail with questions or comments, which should be helped by receipt of the e-mail newsletter sent out by the network weekly. Members should also feel free to contact the chairman with their ideas for the future work of the group, and how it might encourage use of the network in the future by schools, societies and

individuals who could benefit from its resources.

AJM 31/5/00

Textural amendments have been made to the initial draft of this report by Stuart Low with AJM’s approval.

Attachments:

1. List of User Group Members

2. Testaments Handout

3. TLFA Handout

4. SAS Handout