Dear NRA-list,

We would like to share our discussions and experience at George Padmore Institute (GPI) archives, with regard to how to approach the Coronavirus risk. We drafted this email yesterday. Obviously in light of the new government guidelines on avoiding use of public transport and of staying at home, and in light of decisions by ARA and ICA and other archival institutions to work remotely/cancel events, the email below has been somewhat taken over by events. We share our reflections nonetheless. 

1.	We initiated discussions about two weeks ago as to what to do, recognising the key issues as being: the safety of staff, volunteers, researchers and attendees of events at GPI. We considered the main risks to be: a) staff coming to and from work at peak hours on public transport, involving several different trains/buses on journeys lasting more than an hour each journey, b) a very small physical work space in the GPI building that means contagion is very easy, c) a research base that is mainly younger people, who may be potential carriers but asymptomatic, d) a volunteer team that is comprised of both younger people plus also elderly people in higher risk group. 

2.	Proposals we discussed included a) having an ad hoc day-to-day approach, b) working towards a definite date from which we would close and work from home as much as possible, and continually review this process as events unfold. This proposal included the option of either speeding up the plan, or slowing it down in accordance with changing events, c) putting a moratorium on new bookings for researchers and other meetings, d) cancelling all existing meetings after a certain date. E) opening only one day per week, and having a staff rota, to distribute the risk. We did not all agree what do to, or at what pace to move, so it was decided to be very flexible in a way that both respected individual needs and concerns, but also aimed at continuing the archival service. People were allowed to work from home as they saw fit, or to change their travel hours. Some meetings with external stakeholders, including a workshop and a discussion meeting cancelled/postponed indefinitely, and some volunteers chose not to come in. We were met with a sense of understanding when we postponed events, and none of the invitees showed any frustration, anger or resentment at our decisions. At GPI we have the luxury of being a small, independent organisation - once we have taken a decision it's easier to implement - although we have less resources.

3.	One member of staff did show symptoms of coronavirus, and went through the 111 process, but was not granted a test. At this point this member of staff began working from home. Over the next days, the symptoms worsened, and the staff member was referred by 111 for an ambulance visit at their home. Although the person was not admitted to hospital, we assumed that the most likely scenario was that the person was coronavirus positive, despite the fact that they have not been, and will not be, tested due to the government policy to not test most people. At this point, GPI decided to formally close for one week in order to take precautions, and then to review the situation. We believe transparency and caution are important in the situation. Consequently, we have contacted everyone we met, and cancelled all upcoming events. We have alerted people to this decision on our website, at https://www.georgepadmoreinstitute.org/temporary-closure-george-padmore-institute .

4.	We have also had some external events (organised by other institutions) that GPI staff were meant to attend in the coming period indefinitely postponed by the organisers. We consider this to be totally justifiable, and that such postponement/cancellation should be taken at the discretion of the organisers and that institutions should not feel the need to be apologetic for taking such actions. 

Our rationale is as follows:
1.	While we recognise that archives are a vital public good and provide a vital public service, and are certainly essential in the long run (as described in the ICA’s Universal Declaration on Archives), we also think it is both fair to say, and appropriate to recognise, that in the short run, they are not as much of an essential public service as, for example, the provision of water, gas, electricity, medical treatment, transportation, waste collection, sewage treatment or food provision. We consider that if it is justifiable for archives to close for a few weeks for stock-taking, which many if not most archives do at least once per year, we believe it is certainly justified for archives to close for a period due to coronavirus, and that no further justification is needed. 

2.	We recognise that there are obviously complications to this argument. The two main ones are that: a) some archival institutions will play more of an essential public service role than others, depending on the kind of records they hold, and the impact of their closure, even if just for a short time, can be much more socially disruptive, b) we have no clear idea how long this coronavirus situation will be with us, but it seems very apparent it will last much more than just a week or two, but more likely will run over several months at the very least, and conceivably much longer than that too.

3.	At GPI we are still taking steps for immediate implementation, but we recognise that given the long-term and uncertain nature of the problem, we will very soon need to develop a coherent long-term approach and plan. 

4.	We welcome all the stuff that's currently being posted to this list. Coordination and exchange at the sectoral level are clearly a very important part of all this.

Stay safe,
GPI 

Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]

For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra