Skip to main content

2026 APTrust Census

Public dashboard — 12 (of 21) Sustaining Members · aggregate & analysis data only · Spring Member Meeting, May 2026

Open to the World

Impact at a glance

Deposit totals as of April 2026; associate member deposits rolled up to sustaining member. All figures reflect the 12 institutions that permitted world-aggregate sharing.

Avg. overall value
4.8
out of 5.0
Avg. community value
4.6
out of 5.0
Rated 5/5 overall
9
of 12 institutions
Rated 5/5 community
8
of 12 institutions

Preserved content — growth & scale

Cumulative content preserved over time

Community crossed 500 TB in 2025. The past two years alone account for more than half of all content ever deposited.

New content deposited each year

2025 saw +169.5 TB added — more than any prior year. 2026* is through April only and already on a strong pace.

Storage tier distribution

Content is distributed across Deep Archive and High Assurance tiers.

Expected new deposits (calendar year)

Deposit projections are broadly stable year-over-year, with most institutions expecting 1–50 TB of new deposits in both 2026 and 2027.

What's being preserved

Content types deposited to APTrust — frequency across 12 institutions

The community

Years of continuous membership

Average tenure is 9.6 years among these 12 institutions. Two-thirds have been members for over a decade.

Tenure at a glance

5
Founding-era members, 13–14 years
3
Long-term members, 10–12 years
1
Mid-tenure member, 4 years
3
Recent members, 1–3 years

Strong retention across founding, established, and newly onboarded members reflects lasting value in the shared infrastructure model.

Staffing & operational scale

DP FTEs across 12 institutions

1.7
Average
FTE per institution
1.0
Median
FTE per institution
0–5.5
Range
FTE across respondents
7 of 12
Lightly staffed
have 1 FTE or fewer

Most DP programs operate with a single dedicated FTE — underscoring why shared community infrastructure is especially valuable.

Local storage volume (all 12)

Tools used across the community

Reported by 12 institutions. Format identification and transfer tools appear most frequently, reflecting the workflow reality of lean programs that must characterize, move, and verify content reliably.

Format identification
Transfer & validation
Forensics & ingest
Other

3 institutions also rely on custom-built in-house systems not listed here.

Institutional challenges (past 12 months)

Challenge types reported

6 of 12 institutions in this group reported at least one challenge.

Greatest resource needs

Counts reflect institutions citing each category; one institution may cite multiple needs.

Workflows & deposit automation

Current deposit workflow

Desired deposit workflow

Current initiatives

Digital preservation strengths

Pillars of DP program strength

Themes identified from open-text responses across 12 institutions.

8
of 12
Administrative support
Leadership buy-in, dean/AD backing, active institutional commitment to digital preservation
7
of 12
Dedicated staffing
Dedicated DP positions, committed individuals, or specialist units focused on preservation work
5
of 12
Technical expertise
In-house developers, technical staff, or growing technical skills within preservation teams
5
of 12
Collaboration & coordination
Working groups, cross-departmental coordination, and strong internal relationships

Administrative support is the dominant theme — cited by two-thirds of respondents — underscoring how community infrastructure like APTrust enables programs to sustain and grow even when internal resources are limited.

Broader preservation ecosystem

Repository & preservation platforms in use

Systems reported (commercial, non-commercial, and repository software). Institutions often run multiple platforms for different collection types.

View platform data as table
Repository and preservation platforms in use — 12 institutions
PlatformInstitutions (of 12)
DSpace4
Hyrax / Fedora3
Archivematica2
Preservica2
Archive-It2
ArchivesSpace2
Figshare or Esploro2
CONTENTdm1

Infrastructure hosting model

How institutions host their preservation and repository systems. Institutions may appear in more than one category.

10
Locally hosted
of 12 institutions
5
SaaS
vendor-managed cloud
2
Cloud IaaS
self-managed in cloud

Most institutions run significant local infrastructure alongside APTrust — underscoring why shared cloud preservation reduces duplicated investment.

Other preservation organizations members belong to

Interest in sponsoring associate members

9  Sustaining Members have established — or are actively establishing — Associate Members.

Barriers cited: lack of viable candidates, unclear infrastructure requirements.