IMLSFieldNotebookNotes

Attendance

Bianca, Chris, Suzanne, Anne, Martin, Julie Myers, Danielle, Becky, Rusty, Doug, Barbara M., Judy, Connie, Clare, Grace, Erin, Tom

Project summary:

A brief summary of the project as I understand it with thanks to Rusty and Anne's CLIR proposal for a good part of the language. Please read and let me know if there is anything unclear, missiong or just plain wrong. thanks. Barbara

Summary of proposed collaborative project for IMLS National Leadership Grant:

Deadline: February 1, 2010
Term: 3 years
Amount: to be determined based on combined cost share (1:1 match)
Estimated total including cost share: $750,000

The following institutions have agreed to be partners:

• California Academy of Sciences (will act as lead)
• Missouri Botanical Garden (can add a larger match based on a Moore Foundation Grant)
• American Museum of Natural History
• Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia
• Harvard University Botany Libraries
• Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology Library
• New York Botanical Garden (?)
• Smithsonian can match $50,000 from a CLIR award
• BHL can also match?

Abstract:
The Biodiversity Field Notebook Project is a collaborative effort among Libraries, Archives and Museums to develop an innovative framework for integrating primary source documents, particularly field and specimen notebooks, with museum collections and digitized published literature.

It is an extension of the Biodiversity Heritage Library, a consortium of ten major natural history museum libraries, botanical libraries, and research institutions that have joined forces to deliver important, page-level digital content representing the core of published literature on natural history. A revised data model and metadata schema supports the description and delivery of printed pages.

Locating an original journal or field book can be a lengthy and frustrating exercise, particularly since collections and their documentation are often spread over many institutions. Field books are important for supplementing collection data. It would be useful to get better and more accurate access to information like:

• dates
• localities (ultimately including GIS)
• diary entries
• drawings
• general commentary

In addition, links to publications relevant to the expeditions, their staff and to specimens collected would serve as a valuable resource to the scientific community.

As part of a previous funding opportunity, the Smithsonian Institution has agreed to develop a registry application for their primary source natural history materials with the framework of an international discovery standard (NCD), then arrange for these objects to be exposed to an able and willing partner (BHL) to facilitate page-level delivery of digital content. As partner for this IMLS proposal, they agree to expand this registry to include other natural history institutions, allowing for integrated resource discovery not limited by institutional boundaries. NCD was developed by a consortium that included staff from AMNH, Missouri Botanical, the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History and the Harvard MCZ, as well as the Natural History Museum (London).

Linking field notebooks to published materials will be relatively easy since both share similar metadata schemas. Linking to specimen records is, obviously, more problematic because of description and scale and solutions will be explored during the course of the project. Part of this project will be to examine how the Tropicos project might serve as a model to do this.

The AMNH Department of Vertebrate Paleontology has a number of digitized and transcribed field notebooks online. The digital images and data that compose these virtual field notebooks can serve immediately as raw material that can be used to develop the proof of concept for this project.

The scope of the project will be determined when the total amount of cost share has been determined. At minimum, the plan is to develop the infrastructure which will continue to grow on an ongoing basis. Each institution will submit a sample group of Field Notebooks which will be scanned (if necessary) and cataloged into the registry.

Some meeting notes:

CLIR

Rusty with Anne gave back ground of CLIR grant for Field Notebooks. Anne Van Camp.
Primary motivation for CLIR: Field Books important supplementing collection data. Contained information and data that never made it to the specimens records. Events and other data that never made it to the labels. Date locality and account of events with diary entries and drawings and commentary. Knew this was supplementary but (secondary collection information or auxillary) attempt to locate all sources for expeditions proved that this was a really big problem. The distribution (if not a person but an expedition) are very dispersed. You have to go looking for them. If there is a name that helps. Even within one institution, the Smithsonian, still had problems.

Hi all, I'm summarizing ( for those who were absent and for me so I can get a better handle on this: Please comment if you like, Barbara
I'm going to do this offline for those who are notified with each edit....back at you soon...b
To summarize:

Mission Statement:

The Biodiversity Field Notebook Project is a collaboration among Libraries, Archives and Museums to develop an innovative framework for integrating primary source documents with museum collections and digitized published literature.

1. Field books important for supplementing collection data. It would be useful to get better and more accurate access to information like:

• date
• locality (ultimately including GIS)
• diary entries
• drawings
• general commentary

The ideal vision (Becky--please add your cloud to this) would be to link directly by clicking on a line in a field notebook or a transcription of a line in a field notebook directly to, or from, an image of a specimen and then click on another link and find everything that was ever written about it. However, this would require scanning, transcription and then links to items (millions and millions of items). So how can we make this easier? Bianca talked about crowd sourcing for transcription so if we had an (innovative!!) framework that could be filled in over time, that could be doable. Meanwhile, we could start with page views.

1a. Also important are links to bib records for publications (through the BHL data model) Bianca, do you have a readily available list of BHL MARC data fields that you could add to this WIKI? That would help a lot.

2. It would be really good to know where all the field books are in one (and many) institution(s).

• Registry for Smithsonian (CLIR)
• rest of us join in (IMLS)

This is a really good doable (thank you Smithsonian) start and I suggest that part of our proposal would be to include many more records to the registry and to continue to do so as an ongoing process. The data for the registry records will be the basis from which other relationships (links) will be made. Anyone disagree?


A registry will have a better idea of where material can be found and located. The material is unique ("one up objects"). Primary goal is to locate, catalog, and add to a registery.
BHL committment to digitize these objects to make them available. To deliver the complete content. A record needs to be created that is beyond the typical archival record. Smithsonian is a proof of concept for the CLIR grant, but always intended for a community involvement.
First steps include agreement of the metadata and details needed or should be gathered to be useful. How do we map it to BHL for digitization and CDL for discovery?

• CLIR: Location
  • Describing
  • Data schema to link to BHL and to NCD (What the data is, how detailed, defining the objects) NEEDS to happen IMMEDIATELY.
  • Canvasing SI community to find out what we have and where. Compelling to participate by the idea of digitizing and available.
  • Toolset to help others contribute to the whole. (Smithsonian has committed to the technical aspects, managing, sustainability)

• Personnel:
  • Project manager and Head of cataloging. The cataloging won’t be happening until after project manager is in place and schema is built.
  • Cataloging effort is the major part of other institution.
  • The tool and system might have IMLS support

• Schema unknown how long to build.
• Collection or individual items. Both? Discovery to the "thing" level. Defining “thing” is a disscusion point - collection, a journal, a single item?
• NOT include:
  • conservation
  • scanning
  • marking up
• Lot of things are not in archives or library so there are issues with some long term sustainable control. If the material is not planned to fit into a sustainable, control physical place, it will not be included in the CLIR Project. The real thing has to be in physical location.
• NCD has the four required fields. Levels of description is going to vary.
• Consider matching funds from CLIR for IMLS
• Look for things out there to adapt. NCD and Archival standards and BHL schema/ data model of the title with pages.
• IMLS delivery the digital object plus conservation, delicate handling, how much can go through IA and what needs boutique.
  • Most will need boutique scanning.
• SI Archives is experimenting flat objects. IMLS planning grant was still bound machines. High percent is bound.
• Scientist – what pieces do you need to know: locate and use? People, Event to big entry point. Dates and People and Places. People Place Time Event – conversation needed to go further about detail. Word on the page? Species? General description could have.
• Who are the users? NCD already had these discussions. Social contribution? Tagging capability etc. User group contribution.
• Issues: remember the security issues. Sensitive data. Detail information will probably not expose sensitive data.
• IMLS – Digital rights management at page level. Trusted user can “digitally check out”. Harvard model: two version one with blurred out sensitive. IA is starting to do “in copyright” digital rights management delivery system – possibly build on.

BHL

Project starting now on page level annotation with Darwin library project –

• Flickr style annotations with boxes etc. Could translate to Field books pages. Man power time consuming giant problem. Not scope of IMLS. Mention as possibility down the road.

Dream would be rekey, scientific recognition, linking to published literature at articles, links to digital images or data about the specimens.
Cloud all relating and link.
No linkages that are seamless or not possible now.
To be different and scan and put it up on line and have nothing. That isn’t new or leadership. PDF isn’t helpful. Concern is how and what can be done with scans. Problem is to find specimens that are mentioned in her field notebooks.

BHL Data Model

BHL Data Model_2009.pdf

What makes this Leadership?

• The model and the process.
  • Add data in SI “field note registry” – then digitize field notes – then upload Internet Archive/BHL - then community mash up artists do their thing and bring in specimen data
• Make hidden collections available to the community so they can find it.
• May not be the technology might be more or different that we need to discuss. Some money may need to add to development of CLIR toolkit.
• Type of material and product and development of the tools and schema so others can participate One stop shop with natural history or discipline.
• Frame work of big picture – and pick out and what we can prototype.
• There are worries about asking to handle the technology issues - that would eat up the entire grant!
• Once done then do it right and have model when you need to do it again.
• Identifying specimen data already out there. Connecting immediately.
• Technology played down and got more for money.
• Digitize as much as possible with pilot projects with demoing what can be done.
• Register everything.
• System architecture that has the parts.
• Mash up code contest - like Google code contest
• Document what works and what doesn't work
• Can take minimal information from specimens and blend with field note locations to find actual locations
• Interoperability
• Digital rights management at page level for sensitive materials
  • Internet archive is using to lend copyright books – can we build on this?
  • D-Space has a request to view option – might be able to use.

<skip! Lacking notes for a section of time. Anyone got anything to add here?>

Doug and the Engleman Project

St Louis physician with a strong botany interests. He was the go to guy for expeditions heading west from St. Louis and collected many specimens from those expeditions into his hown collection. Donation to the core collection of MOBot.
Connecting to the Tropicos specimen collection
Project is to scan specimens – specimens others collected bu then deposited with Engleman and eventually ended in MOBot.

• NEW PART Exciting aspect is the geospacial information.

IMLS should include link to the geo-spatial information.
Model should be flexible for current and archival. Way the data can be enter back and future.

Mission Statement:

The Biodiversity Field Notebook Project is a collaboration among Libraries, Archives and Museums to develop an innovative framework for integrating primary source documents with museum collections and digitized published literature.

[Notes we took to develop the mission statement
Mission Development Flipchart Notes.pdf]

Partners that Count towards Matching

MOBot; CAL; AMNH; ANSP; Harvard Bot; Harvard MCZ; NYBot(?); plus 50,000 from CLIR; plus BHL matching amount

Stakeholders

• Partners (us and BHL)
• Mash–up artists (including history and humanities writers/documentary film makers)
• TDWG(?) standards setting organization/NDC/BCI
• General public – citizen scientists
• International Digital Library projects ie. EOL, World Digital Library
• Non-partner Natural History Organizations– collection managers, curators

Task Assignment

Task: Barbara - page or two of metadata schemes and standards of all the groups of material and how they can play together. (Potential reference metadata pages here on the wiki like this)

Task: Rusty will review the interns work that identified types of information in botany field notebook collection and determine level of description needed.

Task: Each of us CHOOSE a collection that fits the theme of west of Mississippi exploration WITH specimens collected.

Task: Each look at what the best theme might be best ... possibly not west of Mississippi - collected specimen

Task: Each come up with your matching funds: Salaries. If identified collection then look at the staff on the collection managers

Task: Martin and Becky: Find out indirects on the service contract and how IMLS works it. Volunteer costs allowed and price. Subaward issues.

• From Rachel Frick - Sometimes partners submit their own individual detailed budgets, which included their own IDC rates. These amounts totals are then
  reflected in the primary budget as the costs of sub-contacts (please do not refer to these as sub-awards. IMLS does not allow sub-awards, but
  does allow subcontracts). The information about each organizations IDC rate should be included in the budget justification.
  Oftentimes, the lead organization can only claim IDC on a certain amount of each subcontract. This information will be in the lead organization's
  IDC rate letter. Please explain in the budget justification how the base dollar amount (Section 10 item B, in the detailed budget from)is quantified. (this is
  the amount of the budget that the IDC rate is applied to).
• Yes we do allow the value of volunteer labor to be used as cost
  share. For example, if you have a volunteer that does professional
  cataloging; if you can document that this services would cost $25.00 per
  hour, you can bill it accordingly. The caveat is that you have to track
  the volunteers hours as you would a paid employee of the grant.

Task: Martin find out BHL matching amount of IMLS allowed

Task: Martin find out if Seidell funds count towards matching

Task: Barbara check with NYBot

Task: Clare, Bianca, Rusty will be writing up the problem connecting to Specimen collection for the IMLS grant. Includes listing of contacts witin the partner institutions.

Task: Each identify geographic, time, taxonomically relevant topics to the collection picked from your institution as part of the IMLS grant and the contact person at your institution that manages that collection. Potentially looking at NCD fields to make sure you get all the right data.

Task: Doug puts together a spread sheet that has each of the NCD elements for each of us to use to collect the relevant information.

Flip Chart Notes for Grant Writing:

Grant Development Flipchart Notes

1. Digitize
2. Digital Rights Management
3. Conservation to handle for digitizing
4. APIs & Services that encourage linkages/mashups/new usages of data
5. Engelmann as a pre-model

• a. Human resources & planning as to how to identify/select objects for description/digitization

6. [Some word I can’t read – Achieving?] of sub-award
7.

• a. People (conference/corporate/…)
• b. Events (Expedition, names, etc.)
• c. Time (range of dates, specific days…)
• d. Place (geographic… geo-spatial…)

8. AUTHORITY CONTROL OF THE ABOVE

Grant Check List with Assignments

1. Face Sheet: the Application for Federal Domestic Assistance/Short Organizational Form (SF-424s) Grants.gov form

• P.I. need to fill out…. CAL academy.
• TITLE:
• Brief: Project description off our mission
• Timeline:

2. Abstract Grants.gov form

• 600 words - Last

3. Program Information Sheet IMLS PDF form

• P.I. Cal Academy will fill out

4. Narrative: not to exceed ten pages PDF document

• Cal Acedemy will do an outline and then everyone takes a look on bullet points. And then each take to flesh out.
• Final edits by clear language and consistent Becky and Alice Potter
• Rusty to be the final look it over-er

5. Detailed Budget: replicated for each year of the project IMLS PDF form

• Matching information from all to a community on spread sheet set up by Doug. Doug keeps an eye on the summary etc to make sure budget issues are all reflected.

6. Summary Budget IMLS PDF form

• Doug as point

7. Budget justification PDF document

• (Why requesting… Narrative)
• Hold until budget is finally. Everyone think about parts of this as you plug in budget requested needs. Staff to do what etc.

8. Schedule of completion PDF document

• Rusty - Timeline; Excel spreadsheet; Gant Charts

9. Specifications for Projects That Develop Digital Products (if applicable) IMLS PDF form

• Martin with Becky and Chris Image specs BHL

10. Partnership Statement (if applicable) IMLS PDF form

• Each partner fills in the form.
• Martin and Becky talk with Rachael about some of the partnering issues (Smithsonian)

11. Organizational profile PDF document

• Lead needs to fill this in CAL

12. List of key project staff and consultants PDF document

• Connie puts together lists – creates list and follow up to make sure everyone follows up.

13. Resumes for key project staff: not to exceed two pages per person PDF document

• Everyone submit resumes and cv to CAL
• Rusty will be working on CLIR that can be shared PD

14. Proof of nonprofit status (if applicable) PDF document

• CAL

15. Current federally negotiated rate for indirect costs (if applicable) PDF document

• CAL

16. Supporting documentation (if applicable) PDF document

• Tom talk to Jim Edwards EOL for a letter of support.
• Martin talk to Dave Remsen from GBIF for letter of support.
• Barbara talk to John V. at WDL for letter of support.
• Rusty will talk to someone at NH for letter of support.

Draft Notes for Narrative:

Mission:
The Biodiversity Field Notebook Project is a collaboration among Libraries, Archives and Museums to develop an innovative framework for integrating primary source documents with museum collections and digitized published literature.

I. Define Field Notebook
Any primary source document created in the field (define better) in the course of exploration and collecting of
Any original or primary source document that describes collecting events. Field or list afterwards in the laboratory.
Primary, manuscripts, original materials – drafts of leading to publications
Collecting events and observational / description events.
Linkable to specimens, personal names, and taxonomic treatments.
May include geographical descriptions, observations of situations that might include everything from the trip events, sky and weather observations,

2. Define Framework
Information architecture and metadata standards used to link the objects and data together for description discovery and delivery
Assessment of need – Valuation from CLIR lift from that

Audience – CLIR and our stakeholder list: Our own partnership, Mashup artists, TDWG, General public and citizen scientist, international dig project: eol, wdl, europeana, Non partner natural history SPNHC
Design Scope Goal and Plan. Implementation and expected results:

Project Design:
Evaluation plan: Assess

AARR: Anne And Rusty Repository – can this be a measurable goal? CLIR evaluation of impact –

CAL will be hiring a project manager to assist in the division and handling of the funds. Each partner will have staff dedicated to collection management yadda

Different states of each of our collections. Stages of readiness at each institution
Evaluation criteria
Dissemination
We will tap into the already eager mashup folk

Contest

Professional field: Librarians, Archives, Museum, Scientists – biological disciplines – taxonomist, ecologist, land planners, biogeographers, etc
Lift from CLIR
Links from specimen databases if possible
BHL ingest eventually.

Webpage delivery – and the mashup artists are known already to want this linkability stuff. Wilkes example.

Riding on the tails of other projects by presenting and listservs in this other professional area of TDWG, International Biologist meetings, beside traditional library communities. Any place CLIR goes. Brings together other participants exposure to areas usually not available. East coast libraries and archives in the Online Archive of California.

Scans going to IA - for Open Library Initiatives.

Sustainability – Use CLIR Smithsonian and BHL
Evaluation