STHC-L: The Science, Technology and Health Care Archives Forum

[Previous Posting] [Next Posting]

RE: QUERY: science/technology archives 

Since one thread in this discussion pertains to retention of contracts 
and grant applications, I asked Victoria Harden (NIH Historian), who 
presented a paper on NIH intramural grant records and lab notebooks at 
an SAA meeting about 3 years ago, to comment (see below; I snipped off 
her introductory sentence and am forwarding that part which I know she 
permitted me to forward!). 

Russell



--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 15:37:12 -0400 
From: "Harden, Victoria (OD)" 
Subject: RE: QUERY: science/technology archives
Sender: "Harden, Victoria (OD)" 
To: "'rjohnson@library.ucla.edu'" 

Reply-To: "Harden, Victoria (OD)" 
Message-ID: <622CE20EA080D111A3B60000BC0E0E1101726E77@odexc2.od.nih.gov>


...

I have appended my reply to him [DeGraaf] below, which you may post, 
if you like, along with my comments here about grants.  My comments to 
DeGraaf emphasize my concern with intramural NIH (the in-house 
laboratories mostly in Bethesda) documents, but the situation with 
grant records also merits concern.  

Federal historians would welcome the support of our academic colleagues in
trying to convince NARA to retain grant records as permanent records.  I have
copies of two letters from NARA in the 1980s and 1990s stating that grant
records have been judged as having no permanent historical value (the "end
product" of federally funded research is viewed as adequately documented by the
technical publications).  These letters came in response to initiatives from
Records Managers and Historians at NIH.  No "unfunded" grants information is
saved because of Privacy Act issues.  Summary information is published (see
bibliography at http://www.nih.gov/od/museum/history/bibs/grants.html) and
posted on the NIH website at:
http://www.nih.gov/welcome/almanac97/chapt3/toc.htm#TOP for historical data and
at
http://www.nih.gov/grants/award/award.htm for data from 1985 to the present.
What is missing, of course, is the evaluation by peers contained in the "pink
sheet." 

I believe that NARA may be reviewing its policies about scientific records, so
this may be a good time to express concern.  

If you accept the premise that science, medicine, and technology are responsible
for a great deal of the way twentieth-century people have lived, then preserving
the records of these endeavors is very important.  It may be impossible for all
federal scientific records to be centralized, and, if so, provision should be
made for each agency to maintain an archive documenting its contributions.  A
museum containing the instrument and other artifactual records, such as the
Stetten Museum at NIH (see http://www.nih.gov/od/museum) is one possibility.  A
biomedical history center is another, but it is problematic for federal records,
which, by law, must be cared for in public repositories by public funds with
public oversight.

Victoria A. Harden
****************************
PREVIOUS POST TO LEONARD DEGRAFF
Your inquiry to H-sci-med-tech was forwarded to me.  A few years ago, I made a
presentation to SAA about the loss of scientific records of the NIH intramural
laboratories.  At that time, we were in the middle of a study with NARA about
what intramural records should be saved.  I was particularly concerned with the
laboratory notebooks.  Unfortunately, because of the non-bureaucratic structure
at NIH, those notebooks are not numbered or kept in any order that is easily
understood by NARA archivists, who have no background in science.  One archivist
looked at a Nobel laureate's notebook and asked us to explain why information on
a randomly chosen page was important.  When we couldn't just by looking at it on
the spot, this archivist concluded that the notebook was of no historic value.

To date, NARA has not issued its report on the disposition of NIH laboratory
records, and those records continue to be thrown away as scientists leave.  This
is a terrible loss to the American people, but unless agencies are willing to
set up their own archives, it looks as if scientific records organized as they
are at NIH will not be saved.

The archivists at SAA were very interested in the problem as I presented it,
but, unfortunately, no action was forthcoming to alter the situation.  Good luck
on your presentation.

Victoria A. Harden
*****************
Victoria A. Harden
Historian, NIH
Director, DeWitt Stetten, Jr., Museum of Medical Research
Building 31  Room 2B09  MSC 2092
National Institutes of Health
Bethesda, MD 20892-2092
(301) 496-6610 (voice)
(301) 402-1434 (fax)
vharden@helix.nih.gov (email)

--- End Forwarded Message ---


___________________________________________________

Russell A. Johnson        rjohnson@library.ucla.edu

Archivist              (310) 825-3191  or  206-2753
Neuroscience History Archives
Brain Research Institute, UCLA
Box 951761     Los Angeles CA  90095-1761

Special Collections Cataloger        (310) 825-6940
Louise M. Darling Biomedical Library, UCLA
Box 951798     Los Angeles CA  90095-1798
<STHC-L@library.ucla.edu>   [STHC-L Archives -- Main Index]  [STHC-L Archives -- 1998 Message Index]