2016-11

Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00

Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements
Background & General Guidance
The Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements are intended to reflect the characteristics oftrustworthy repositories. As such, all Requirements are mandatory and are equally weighted, standalone
items. Although some overlap is unavoidable, duplication of evidence sought among Requirements has been
keep to a minimum where possible. The choices contained in checklists (e.g., repository type and curationlevel) are not considered to be comprehensive, and additional space is provided in all cases for the applicant
to add ‘other’ (missing) options. This and any comments given may then be used to refine such lists in the
future.
Each Requirement in the Catalogue is accompanied by guidance text to assist applicants in providing
sufficient evidence that their repositories meet the Requirement, outlining the types of information that areviewer will expect in order to perform an objective assessment. Furthermore, the applicant must indicate acompliance level for each of the Requirements:
0 – Not applicable
1 – The repository has not considered this yet
2 – The repository has a theoretical concept
3 – The repository is in the implementation phase
4 – The guideline has been fully implemented in the repository
Compliance levels provide a useful part of the self-assessment process, but all applicants will be judged
against statements supported by appropriate evidence; not against self-assessed compliance levels. In thisregard, if the applicant believes a Requirement is not applicable, the reason for this must be documented indetail. Note also that compliance levels 1 and 2 can be valid for internal self-assessments, while certification
may be granted if some guidelines are considered to be at level 3—in the implementation phase—since theRequirements include an assumption of a repository’s continuous improvement.
Reponses must be in English. Although attempts will be made to match reviewers to applicants in terms oflanguage and discipline, this is not always possible. If evidence is in another language, an English summary
must be provided in the self-assessment.
Because core certification does not involve a site visit, the Requirements should be supported by links topublic evidence. Nevertheless, it is understood that for reasons such as security, it may not always possible
to include all information on an organization’s website, and provisions are made within the certification
process for repositories who want sensitive parts of their evidence to remain confidential.
Repositories are required to be reassessed every three years. It is recognized that while basic systems andcapabilities evolve continuously according to technology and user needs, they may not undergo majorchanges in this timeframe. However, the Trustworthy Repository ISO standard (ISO 16363) has a five-year
review cycle, and a shorter period is considered necessary for a core trust standard to allow for possible
modifications and corrections. Hence, an organization with well-managed records and business processes
should reasonably expect to be able to submit an application with only minimal revisions after three years,
unless the Requirements themselves have been updated within the intervening period.

Glossary of Terms
Please refer to the Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements Glossary: https://goo.gl/rQK5RN.

1

2016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00

Requirements
Background Information
Context
R0. Please provide context for your repository.
– Repository Type. Select all relevant types from:● Domain or subject-based repository● Institutional repository● National repository system, including governmental● Publication repository● Library/Museum/Archives● Research project repository● Other (Please describe)
Comments– Brief Description of the Repository’s Designated Community– Level of Curation Performed. Select all relevant types from:
A. Content distributed as deposited
B. Basic curation – e.g., brief checking, addition of basic metadata or documentation
C. Enhanced curation – e.g., conversion to new formats, enhancement of documentation
D. Data-level curation – as in C above, but with additional editing of deposited data for accuracy
Comments– Outsource Partners. If applicable, please list them.
– Other Relevant Information
Response
Guidance:
To assess a repository, reviewers need some information about the repository to set it in context. Please
select from among the options and provide details for the items that appear in the Context requirement.
(1) Repository Type. This item will help reviewers understand what function your repository performs.
Choose the best match for your repository type (select all that apply). If none of the categories isappropriate, feel free to provide another descriptive type. You may also provide further details to help thereviewer understand your repository type.
(2) Repository's Designated Community. This item will be useful in assessing how the repository
interacts and communicates with its target community. Please make sure that the response is specific—for
example, ‘quantitative social science researchers and instructors’.
(3) Level of Curation. This item is intended to elicit whether the repository distributes its content to data
consumers without any changes, or whether the repository adds value by enhancing the content in someway All levels of curation assume initial deposits are retained unchanged and that edits are only made on
copies of those originals. Annotations/edits must fall within the terms of the licence agreed with the data
producer and be clearly within the skillset of those undertaking the curation. Thus, the repository will be
expected to demonstrate that any such annotations/edits are undertaken and documented by appropriate
experts and that the integrity of all original copies is maintained. Knowing this will help reviewers inassessing other certification requirements. Further details can be added that would help to understand the22016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00

levels of curation you undertake.
(4) Outsource Partners. Please provide a list of Outsource Partners that your organization works with,describing the nature of the relationship (organizational, contractual, etc.), and whether the Partner has
undertaken any trustworthy repository assessment. Such relationships may include, but are not limited to:any services provided by an institution you are part of, storage provided by others as part of multicopy
redundancy, or membership in organizations that may undertake stewardship of your data collection whena business continuity issue arises. Moreover, please list the certification requirements for which thePartner provides all, or part of, the relevant functionality/service, including any contracts or Service Level
Agreements in place. Because outsourcing will almost always be partial, you will still need to provide
appropriate evidence for certification requirements that are not outsourced and for the parts of the data
lifecycle that you control. Qualifications/certifications—including, but not limited to, the DSA or WDS
certifications—are preferred for outsource partners. However, it is not a necessity for them to be certified.
We understand that this can be a complex area to define and describe, but such details are essential toensure a comprehensive review process.
(5) Other Relevant Information. The repository may wish to add extra contextual information that is notcovered in the Requirements but that may be helpful to the reviewers in making their assessment. For
example, you might describe:●●●

The usage and impact of the repository data holdings (citations, use by other projects, etc.).
A national, regional, or global role that the repository serves.
Any global cluster or network organization that the repository belongs to.

3

2016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00

Organizational Infrastructure
I. Mission/Scope
R1. The repository has an explicit mission to provide access to and preserve data in its domain.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
Repositories take responsibility for stewardship of digital objects, and to ensure that materials are held in
the appropriate environment for appropriate periods of time. Depositors and users must be clear that
preservation of, and continued access to, the data is an explicit role of the repository.
For this Requirement, please describe:● Your organization’s mission in preserving and providing access to data, and include links to
explicit statements of this mission.
● The level of approval within the organization that such a mission statement has received (e.g.,
approved public statement, roles mandated by funders, policy statement signed off by governing
board).

II. Licenses
R2. The repository maintains all applicable licenses covering data access and use and monitors
compliance.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
Repositories must maintain all applicable licenses covering data access and use, communicate about
them with users, and monitor compliance. This Requirement relates to the access regulations andapplicable licenses set by the data repository itself, as well as any codes of conduct that are generally
accepted in the relevant sector for the exchange and proper use of knowledge and information. Reviewers
will be seeking evidence that the repository has sufficient controls in place according to the access criteriaof their data holdings, as well as evidence that any relevant licences or processes are well managed.
For this Requirement, please describe:● License agreements in use.
● Conditions of use (distribution, intended use, protection of sensitive data, etc.).
● Documentation on measures in the case of noncompliance with conditions of access and use.
Note that if all data holdings are completely public and without conditions imposed on users—such as
attribution requirements or agreement to make secondary analysis openly available—then it can simply bestated.
This Requirement must be read in conjunction with R4 (Confidentiality/Ethics) to the extent that ethical andprivacy provisions impact on the licenses. Assurance that deposit licences provide sufficient rights for therepository to maintain, preserve, and offer access to data is covered under R10 (Preservation Plan).

4

2016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00

III. Continuity of access
R3. The repository has a continuity plan to ensure ongoing access to and preservation of its
holdings.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
This Requirement covers the measures in place to ensure access to, and availability of, data holdings,
both currently and in the future. Reviewers are seeking evidence that preparations are in place to address
the risks inherent in changing circumstances.
For this Requirement, please describe:● The level of responsibility undertaken for data holdings, including any guaranteed preservation
periods.
● The medium-term (three- to five-year) and long-term (> five years) plans in place to ensure thecontinued availability and accessibility of the data. In particular, both the response to rapidchanges of circumstance and long-term planning should be described, indicating options forrelocation or transition of the activity to another body or return of the data holdings to their owners(i.e., data producers). For example, what will happen in the case of cessation of funding, which
could be through an unexpected withdrawal of funding, a planned ending of funding for a timelimited project repository, or a shift of host institution interests?
Evidence for this Requirement should relate more to governance than to the technical information that isneeded in R10 (Preservation plan) and R14 (Data reuse), and should cover the situation in which R1(Mission/Scope) changes. This Requirement contrasts with R15 (Technical infrastructure) and R16(Security) in that it covers full business continuity of the preservation and access functions.

IV. Confidentiality/Ethics
R4. The repository ensures, to the extent possible, that data are created, curated, accessed, andused in compliance with disciplinary and ethical norms.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
Adherence to ethical norms is critical to responsible science. Disclosure risk—for example, the risk that anindividual who participated in a survey can be identified or that the precise location of an endangered
species can be pinpointed—is a concern that many repositories must address. Evidence sought isconcerned with not only having good practices for data with disclosure risks, but also the necessity tomaintain the trust of those agreeing to have personal/sensitive data stored in the repository.
For this Requirement, responses should include evidence related to the following questions:● How does the repository comply with applicable disciplinary norms?
● Does the repository request confirmation that data collection or creation was carried out inaccordance with legal and ethical criteria prevailing in the data producer's geographical location or
discipline (e.g., Ethical Review Committee/Institutional Review Board or Data Protection
legislation)?
● Are special procedures applied to manage data with disclosure risk?
● Are data with disclosure risk stored appropriately to limit access?
● Are data with disclosure risk distributed under appropriate conditions?
52016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00●

Are procedures in place to review disclosure risk in data, and to take the necessary steps to either
anonymize files or to provide access in a secure way?
● Are staff trained in the management of data with disclosure risk?
● Are there measures in place if conditions are not complied with?
● Does the repository provide guidance in the responsible use of disclosive, or potentially disclosive
data?
Evidence for this Requirement should be in alignment with provisions for the procedures stated in R12(Workflows) and for any licenses in R2 (Licences).

V. Organizational infrastructure
R5. The repository has adequate funding and sufficient numbers of qualified staff managed througha clear system of governance to effectively carry out the mission.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
Repositories need funding to carry out their responsibilities, along with a competent staff who haveexpertise in data archiving. However, it is also understood that continuity of funding is seldom guaranteed,
and this must be balanced with the need for stability.
For this Requirement, responses should include evidence related to the following:● The repository is hosted by a recognized institution (ensuring long-term stability and sustainability)
appropriate to its Designated Community.
● The repository has sufficient funding, including staff resources, IT resources, and a budget for
attending meetings when necessary. Ideally this should be for a three- to five-year period.
● The repository ensures that its staff have access to ongoing training and professional
development.
● The range and depth of expertise of both the organization and its staff, including any relevant
affiliations (e.g., national or international bodies), is appropriate to the mission.
Full descriptions of the tasks performed by the repository—and the skills necessary to perform them—maybe provided, if available. Such descriptions are not mandatory, however, as this level of detail is beyond
the scope of core certification.

6

2016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00

VI. Expert guidance
R6. The repository adopts mechanism(s) to secure ongoing expert guidance and feedback (either inhouse, or external, including scientific guidance, if relevant).
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
An effective repository strives to accommodate evolutions in data types, data volumes, and data rates, aswell as to adopt the most effective new technologies in order to remain valuable to its DesignatedCommunity. Given the rapid pace of change in the research data environment, it is therefore advisable fora repository to secure the advice and feedback of expert users on a regular basis to ensure its continued
relevance and improvement.
For this Requirement, responses should include evidence related to the following questions:● Does the repository have in-house advisers, or an external advisory committee that might bepopulated with technical members, data science experts, and disciplinary experts?
● How does the repository communicate with the experts for advice?
● How does the repository communicate with its Designated Community for feedback?
This Requirement seeks to confirm that the repository has access to objective expert advice beyond thatprovided by skilled staff mentioned in R5 (Organizational infrastructure).

7

2016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00

Digital Object Management
VII. Data integrity and authenticity
R7. The repository guarantees the integrity and authenticity of the data.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
The repository should provide evidence to show that it operates a data and metadata management system
suitable for ensuring integrity and authenticity during the processes of ingest, archival storage, and data
access.
Integrity ensures that changes to data and metadata are documented and can be traced to the rationale
and originator of the change.
Authenticity covers the degree of reliability of the original deposited data and its provenance, including therelationship between the original data and that disseminated, and whether or not existing relationships
between datasets and/or metadata are maintained.
For this Requirement, responses on data integrity should include evidence related to the following:● Description of checks to verify that a digital object has not been altered or corrupted (i.e., fixity
checks).
● Documentation of the completeness of the data and metadata.
● Details of how all changes to the data and metadata are logged.
● Description of version control strategy.
● Usage of appropriate international standards and conventions (which should be specified).
Evidence of authenticity management should relate to the follow questions:● Does the repository have a strategy for data changes? Are data producers made aware of thisstrategy?
● Does the repository maintain provenance data and related audit trails?
● Does the repository maintain links to metadata and to other datasets? If so, how?
● Does the repository compare the essential properties of different versions of the same file? How?
● Does the repository check the identities of depositors?
This Requirement covers the entire data lifecycle within the repository, and thus has relationships withworkflow steps included in other requirements—for example, R8 (Appraisal) for ingest, R9 (Documented
storage procedures) and R10 (Preservation plan) for archival storage, and R12–R14 (Workflows, Data
discovery and identification, and Data reuse) for dissemination. However, maintaining data integrity andauthenticity can also be considered a mindset, and the responsibility of everyone within the repository.

8

2016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00

VIII. Appraisal
R8. The repository accepts data and metadata based on defined criteria to ensure relevance andunderstandability for data users.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
The appraisal function is critical in determining whether data meet all criteria for inclusion in the collection
and in establishing appropriate management for their preservation. Care must be taken to ensure that thedata are relevant and understandable to the Designated Community served by the repository.
For this Requirement, responses should include evidence related to the following questions:● Does the repository use a collection development policy to guide the selection of data forarchiving?
● Does the repository have quality control checks to ensure the completeness and understandabilityof data deposited? If so, please provide references to quality control standards and reporting
mechanisms accepted by the relevant community of practice, and include details of how any
issues are resolved (e.g., are the data returned to the data provider for rectification, fixed by therepository, noted by quality flags in the data file, and/or included in the accompanying metadata?)● Does the repository have procedures in place to determine that the metadata required to interpretand use the data are provided?
● What is the repository’s approach if the metadata provided are insufficient for long-termpreservation?
● Does the repository publish a list of preferred formats?
● Are quality control checks in place to ensure that data producers adhere to the preferred formats?
● What is the approach towards data that are deposited in non-preferred formats?
This Requirement addresses quality assurance from the viewpoint of the interaction between the depositorof the data and metadata and the repository. It contrasts with R11 (Data quality), which addresses
metadata and data quality from the viewpoint of the Designated Community.

IX. Documented storage procedures
R9. The repository applies documented processes and procedures in managing archival storage ofthe data.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
Repositories need to store data and metadata from the point of deposit, through the ingest process, to thepoint of access. Repositories with a preservation remit must also offer ‘archival storage’ in OAIS terms.
For this Requirement, responses should include evidence related to the following questions:● How are relevant processes and procedures documented and managed?
● What levels of security are required, and how are these supported?
● How is data storage addressed by the preservation policy?
● Does the repository have a strategy for backup/multiple copies? If so, what is it?
● Are data recovery provisions in place? What are they?
● Are risk management techniques used to inform the strategy?
● What checks are in place to ensure consistency across archival copies?
92016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00● How is deterioration of storage media handled and monitored?
This Requirement deals with high-level arrangements in respect of continuity. Please refer also to R15(Technical infrastructure) and R16 (Security) for details on specific arrangements for backup, physical andlogical security, failover, and business continuity.

X. Preservation plan
R10. The repository assumes responsibility for long-term preservation and manages this function ina planned and documented way.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
The repository, data depositors, and Designated Community need to understand the level of responsibility
undertaken for each deposited item in the repository. The repository must have the legal rights toundertake these responsibilities. Procedures must be documented and their completion assured.
For this Requirement, responses should include evidence related to the following questions:● Is a preservation plan in place?
● Is the ‘preservation level’ for each item understood? How is this defined?
● Does the contract between depositor and repository provide for all actions necessary to meet the
responsibilities?
● Is the transfer of custody and responsibility handover clear to the depositor and repository?
● Does the repository have the rights to copy, transform, and store the items, as well as provide
access to them?
● Are actions relevant to preservation specified in documentation, including custody transfer,
submission information standards, and archival information standards?
● Are there measures to ensure these actions are taken?

XI. Data quality
R11. The repository has appropriate expertise to address technical data and metadata quality andensures that sufficient information is available for end users to make quality-related evaluations.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
Repositories must work in concert with depositors to ensure that there is enough available information
about the data such that the Designated Community can assess the substantive quality of the data. Suchquality assessment becomes increasingly relevant when the Designated Community is multidisciplinary,
where researchers may not have the personal experience to make an evaluation of quality from the dataalone. Repositories must also be able to evaluate the technical quality of data deposits in terms of thecompleteness and quality of the materials provided, and the quality of the metadata.
Data, or associated metadata, may have quality issues relevant to their research value, but this does notpreclude their use in science if a user can make a well-informed decision on their suitability throughprovided documentation.
For this Requirement, please describe:10

2016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00● The approach to data and metadata quality taken by the repository.
● Any automated assessment of metadata adherence to relevant schema.
● The ability of the Designated Community to comment on, and/or rate data and metadata.
● Whether citations to related works or links to citation indices are provided.
Provisions for data quality are also ensured by other Requirements. Specifically, please refer to R8(Appraisal), R12 (Workflows), and R7 (Data integrity and authenticity).

XII. Workflows
R12. Archiving takes place according to defined workflows from ingest to dissemination.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
To ensure the consistency of practices across datasets and services and to avoid ad hoc and reactive
activities, archival workflows should be documented, and provisions for managed change should be inplace. The procedure should be adapted to the repository mission and activities, and procedural
documentation for archiving data should be clear.
For this Requirement, responses should include evidence related to the following:● Workflows/business process descriptions.
● Clear communication to depositors and users about handling of data.
● Levels of security and impact on workflows (guarding privacy of subjects, etc.).
● Qualitative and quantitative checking of outputs.
● Appraisal and selection of data.
● Approaches towards data that do not fall within the mission/collection profile.
● The types of data managed and any impact on workflow.
● Decision handling within the workflows (e.g., archival data transformation).
● Change management of workflows.
This Requirement confirms that all workflows are documented. Evidence of such workflows may havebeen provided as part of other task-specific Requirements, such as for ingest in R8 (Appraisal), storage
procedures in R9 (Documented storage procedures), security arrangements in R16 (Security), andconfidentiality in R4 (Confidentiality/Ethics).

11

2016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00

XIII. Data discovery and identification
R13. The repository enables users to discover the data and refer to them in a persistent way throughproper citation.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
Effective data discovery is key to data sharing, and most repositories provide searchable catalogues
describing their holdings such that potential users can evaluate data to see if they meet their needs. Oncediscovered, datasets should be referenceable through full citations to the data, including persistentidentifiers to ensure that data can be accessed into the future. Citations also provide credit and attribution
to individuals who contributed to the creation of the dataset.
For this Requirement, responses should include evidence related to the following questions:● Does the repository offer search facilities?
● Does the repository maintain a searchable metadata catalogue to appropriate (internationallyagreed) standards?
● Does the repository facilitate machine harvesting of the metadata?
● Is the repository included in one or more disciplinary or generic registries of resources?
● Does the repository offer recommended data citations?
● Does the repository offer persistent identifiers?

XIV. Data reuse
R14. The repository enables reuse of the data over time, ensuring that appropriate metadata are
available to support the understanding and use of the data.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
Repositories must ensure that data can be understood and used effectively into the future despite changes
in technology. This Requirement evaluates the measures taken to ensure that data are reusable.
For this Requirement, responses should include evidence related to the following questions:● Which metadata are required by the repository when the data are provided (e.g., Dublin Core orcontent-oriented metadata)?
● Are data provided in formats used by the Designated Community? Which formats?
● Are measures taken to account for the possible evolution of formats?
● Are plans related to future migrations in place?
● How does the repository ensure understandability of the data?
The concept of ‘reuse’ is critical in environments in which secondary analysis outputs are redeposited into
a repository alongside primary data, since the provenance chain and associated rights issues may thenbecome increasingly complicated.
Reuse is dependent on the applicable licenses covered in R2 (Licenses).

12

2016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00

Technology
XV. Technical infrastructure
R15. The repository functions on well-supported operating systems and other core infrastructural
software and is using hardware and software technologies appropriate to the services it provides to
its Designated Community.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
Repositories need to operate on reliable and stable core infrastructures that maximizes service availability.
Furthermore, hardware and software used must be relevant and appropriate to the Designated Community
and to the functions that a repository fulfils. Standards such as the OAIS reference model specify thefunctions of a repository in meeting user needs.
For this Requirement, responses should include evidence related to the following questions:● What standards does the repository use for reference? Are these international and/or community
standards (e.g., Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) standards, OGC, W3C, or ISO 19115)? How
often are these reviewed?
● How are the standards implemented? Are there any significant deviations from the standard? If so,please explain.
● Does the repository have a plan for infrastructure development? If so, what is it?
● Is a software inventory maintained and is system documentation available?
● Is community-supported software in use? Please describe.
● For real-time to near real-time data streams, is the provision of around-the-clock connectivity to
public and private networks at a bandwidth that is sufficient to meet the global and/or regional
responsibilities of the repository?

XVI. Security
R16. The technical infrastructure of the repository provides for protection of the facility and its data,
products, services, and users.
Compliance Level:
Response
Guidance:
The repository should analyze potential threats, assess risks, and create a consistent security system. It
should describe damage scenarios based on malicious actions, human error, or technical failure that posea threat to the repository and its data, products, services, and users. It should measure the likelihood andimpact of such scenarios, decide which risk levels are acceptable, and determine which measures should
be taken to counter the threats to the repository and its Designated Community. This should be an
ongoing process.
For this Requirement, please describe:● Procedures and arrangements in place to provide swift recovery or backup of essential services inthe event of an outage.
● Your IT security system, disaster plan, and business continuity plan; employees with roles related
to security (e.g., security officers); and any risk analysis tools (e.g., DRAMBORA) you use.
This Requirement describes some of the aspects generally covered by others—for example, R1213

2016-11Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements v01.00(Workflows)—and is supplementary to R9 (Documented storage procedures).

Applicant Feedback
Comments/feedback
These requirements are not seen as final, and we value your input to improve the core certification
procedure. To this end, please leave any comments you wish to make on both the quality of theCatalogue and its relevance to your organization, as well as any other related thoughts.
Response

14