The repository must demonstrate that it has formal, cyclical, proactive business planning processes in place. A brief description of the repository’s business plan should show how the repository will generate income and assets through services, third-party partnerships, grants, and so forth. As for A1.2 (succession/ contingency/escrow planning), the repository must establish these processes when it is viable to avoid business crises. These questions may be pertinent to this requirement:
- Under this plan, to what extent is the repository supported, or expected to be supported, by revenue from content-contributing organizations and agencies, such as publishers?
- To what extent is the repository supported, or expected to be supported, by revenue from subscribers or subscribing institutions?
- What measures are in place, if any, to limit access by nonsubscribing stakeholders?
- What financial incentives are offered, if any, to discourage subscribers from postponing their investment in the repository? From discontinuing investing in the repository?
- To what extent is the repository supported, or expected to be supported, by other kinds of parties?
- How will major future costs, such as migrations, capital improvements, enhancements, providing access in the event of publisher failure, etc., be distributed between publishers, subscribers, and other supporting parties?
- What contingency plans are in place to cover the loss of future revenue and/or outside funding?
- In the event of a catastrophic failure, are reserve assets sufficient to ensure the restoration of subscriber access to content reasonably quickly?
- If this is a national or government-sponsored repository, how is it insulated from political events, such as international conflicts or diplomatic crises, that might affect its ability to serve foreign constituencies?
An awful lot of this TRAC requirement is met simply by being a unit of the the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan. (This will be a recurring theme across a lot of TRAC A4.) The U-M, like most large universities, has an elaborate bureaucracy for managing budgets and expenditures, and producing a cornucopia of reports, statements, and other fine documents.
In addition, like a lot of non-profits across the US, ICPSR produces an annual report that it makes available publicly, and this contains high-level documentation for both planning and reporting. For example, the ICPSR annual report includes a breakdown of revenues and expenses across major areas, and usually contains several essays on recent accomplishments, upcoming initiatives, and areas of focus for the upcoming fiscal year.