When we first announced that the BitCurator Consortium was navigating a deliberative transition, we articulated our commitment to exploring future pathways while being anchored by BCC’s core values—openness, transparency and inclusivity. In the spirit of that commitment, and in order to demonstrate how in organizational phases like these, the transition is the work, we’re sharing key updates and milestones along our journey, for the benefit of our members, collaborators, the larger field of digital forensics, and other organizations who may experience similar sustainability-related transitions.

A major takeaway from our recent experience has been to recognize the ways in which being thoughtful and deliberate in tracking organizational transitions is crucial for maintaining organizational health. By systematically tracking and evaluating each phase of our transition, we have been able to identify and address challenges early, align new strategies with existing goals, and maintain continuity in everyday operations. We believe that this deliberate approach has helped BCC foster resilience, support community morale, and strengthen our ability to adapt to change, ultimately contributing to our long-term stability and success.

As outlined in our last post, our two major goals through Q2/3 of 2024 were to work in partnership with Educopia to:

1. Research and identify a new fiscal host for the BCC and determine a timeline for the move that will start January 2025
2. Research and identify a software maintenance partner for the BitCurator software, and the real costs associated with the same.

Here are the considerations, rationales, and resources with which we approached these streams of work. 

RESEARCHING AND IDENTIFYING A NEW FISCAL HOST

At the outset, we began by launching an invite and then assembling a Transition Team, comprising BCC leadership, representatives from the Community, and Educopia staff. This team’s mandate is to bring together the expertise, perspectives, and efforts of all BCC key stakeholder groups to determine best fit for a new fiscal host, as well as the costs of working with a software maintenance partner, no later than Q3 2024.

Acknowledging the extra labor and time that would go into transition work, we set up a sustainable meeting and working cadence, which included 1 hour-long synchronous meetings every week, calls with potential hosts and software partners, and ~3 hours of asynchronous work per week, depending on the current focus of the group’s energy. The Transition Team makes strategic decisions on behalf of the BCC community, while being responsible for inviting feedback and developing mechanisms for clear communication, including community calls, feedback forms, Q&A sessions, and community votes. Major activities undertaken by the BCC Transition Team include:

1. Streamlining communications: As one might imagine, coordinating these parallel streams of activities necessitates clear and concise communications between all stakeholders involved in the process. These communications centered around monthly Community Calls, where we updated the community about timelines, rationales behind decision-making, what to expect in the near and long term, and our budget—including communicating how member dues are crucial for a successful transition. The Transition Team manages these communications via coordinated presentations, follow-up recap emails with recordings and links to useful resources, and one-pagers that simplified dense information.

2. Creating a Fiscal Sponsorship Guidebook: Educopia took the lead on creating and collating a comprehensive set of supportive materials on Fiscal Sponsorship, in order to enable the Transition Team and the broader community to make informed decisions while evaluating fiscal hosts. This Guidebook included a list of guiding questions for organizations/programs seeking a fiscal host, screening considerations, a list of questions to ask fiscal hosts during initial conversations, a starting checklist for sponsorship, examples of different application processes, and an overview of services provided under most Fiscal Sponsorship offerings. The Guidebook also contained useful templates like a Fiscal Sponsorship Matrix (elaborated below) and links to resources like the National Directory of Fiscal Sponsors.

3. Creating a BCC Program Dossier: In order to identify what BCC is looking for in a fiscal host, the Transition team mapped out the Consortium’s historical and current information, creating a dossier that would serve as both a reference point for stakeholders engaged in the transition process, but also function as an introductory resource for potential sponsors. This dossier contained BCC’s mission and vision, our history, and outlined our member demographics, current leadership and governance structure, and core activity streams. The dossier also mapped all of our assets, painted a picture of our financial health, and listed BCC’s awards and recognitions.

4. Identifying and contacting potential fiscal sponsors: After surveying the broader fiscal sponsorship landscape, Educopia prefilled a Fiscal Sponsorship Matrix with information about fiscal hosts relevant to BCC. The Transition Team began using this matrix to research and evaluate potential fiscal hosts. The matrix allowed us to compare hosts using the same metrics, which in turn were based on BCC’s specific needs: Finance, Legal, and Human Resources services, Leadership Development, and Strategic Development Support, amongst others. Individual members of the Transition Team synthesized the data from the matrix, and recommended their top three alongside their rationales for the same. Questions we asked ourselves during this phase included:

• What types of activities take up the majority of BCC’s time?
• Which of our activities could not be done without an entity providing a legal and tax status?
• What types of operational support is needed for our programmatic activities already underway?
• Were our operational strengths or capabilities enough to sustain the next phase of organizational development, or did we need more help? 
• Are there specific types of fiscal hosting fee structures that work better for BCC?
• Did we need any additional support beyond backbone services, such as communications support, consultation on sustainability planning, grant development support, etc.?
  

Based on our collective synthesis, we began contacting potential fiscal sponsors for initial conversations, for which we created a set of questions, examples of which include:

• What is your fee structure?
• Who owns the intellectual property or development of technology?
• What other projects or organizations have you sponsored similar to us (BCC)?
• And other questions specific to the individual fiscal sponsors and their offerings
  

Next steps: Following the rigorous process outlined above, the Transition Team reached out to five potential fiscal sponsors, and held further discussions with four of them. Following these discussions, the team identified the most suitable options and submitted formal applications to two sponsors. Based on the outcomes of this application process, the Transition Team will provide a well-informed rationale and recommendation to the broader community. Ultimately, the BCC community will make the final decision through a vote by representatives from our member organizations.

“As we lead the BitCurator Consortium through our organizational transition, we’ve learned a lot about various fiscal sponsorship models. Some sponsors offer comprehensive support akin to the Educopia model, while others propose different staffing models and levels of support. Our discussions highlighted the importance of dedicated staffing for key activities like software maintenance and governance, as well as support for our Forum amidst the sponsors’ own events. Ultimately, aligning with sponsors whose missions and values resonate with ours will be crucial for our future direction.” – BCC Transition Team.

RESEARCHING AND IDENTIFYING A SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE PARTNER FOR THE BITCURATOR SOFTWARE

As our research on potential fiscal sponsors progressed, we turned our attention to developing materials to assist in our search for a software maintenance partner for the BitCurator Software. However, progress on this element of our transition has been slower than anticipated. Initially, we planned to divide the Transition Team to allow some members to focus on software maintenance, but we quickly realized that the fiscal host work required the full attention of the entire team. In fact, while preparing our materials, we recognized that our understanding of the BCE and its maintenance needs was not as robust as our grasp of the community’s requirements.

To address this gap, we decided to pause the software maintenance search and engage the community through informational interviews with key contributors and surveys facilitated by BCC members Farrell and Brian Dietz, with the goal of creating a community-driven roadmap that accurately reflects the BCE’s needs. Acknowledging our team’s limitations also led us to consider a fiscal sponsor who could assist us in finding or guiding us toward an appropriate software maintenance partner. As we enter a waiting period for fiscal sponsors, we are now redirecting our efforts toward advancing the software maintenance search.

Similar to finding a good fit for BCC’s fiscal sponsor, we have been following a thorough process in order to identify a software partner for the BitCurator Software: 

1. Creating a BitCurator Software Dossier: Following a process akin to that of the BCC Program Dossier, the Transition Team created a dossier outlining the development history and current status of the BitCurator Software Environment. It includes details on the software’s specifications—such as features, tools, and functionality—as well as its historical context, user base, and a development roadmap that highlights recent user testing, maintenance requirements, development priorities, and governance structure.

2. Populating a Software Maintenance Partner Matrix: This matrix covers information about potential partners’ services, costs, similar projects in their portfolio, why they would be a good fit for BCC, and other relevant information.

3. Collating questions for potential Software Maintenance Partners: E.g., How would you calculate the fees for your support?;  What are the governance mechanisms for the community to vote on development priorities?; How would the software maintenance partner communicate updates and changes to the membership/user community?; etc.

4. Putting together relevant resources: Educopia has taken the lead on compiling past documentation and resources from various BCC committees and projects, such as the Issues Log, Software Development Committee recommendations, the BitCurator Development Timeline, and the BitCurator Maintenance Landscape Analysis Plan, in order to help guide the process.

As we conclude this update on BitCurator Consortium’s transition, it’s evident that our commitment to a thoughtful and deliberate process has been pivotal to our progress. By staying true to our core values of openness, transparency, and inclusivity, we have successfully navigated the complexities of change while ensuring that every step is aligned with our organizational goals. Our methodical approach—evidenced by our work with Educopia, the development of essential resources, and the careful evaluation of potential partners—has enabled us to address challenges proactively and maintain continuity in our operations. Looking ahead, we will continue to prioritize clear communication and collaborative decision-making, confident that these principles will support our ongoing adaptation and long-term success. We are grateful for the engagement and support of our community and partners as we advance through this transition, and we remain dedicated to sharing our journey and learnings with the broader field.

As always, we welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. You can contact the BCC Executive Council at bcc_exec@bitcuratorconsortium.org, or you can reach out via this anonymous form.