Hi Jody,
As you likely know, the RAD standard predates even ISAD(G). Because there was no other well-established archival standard on which to model RAD, it was first developed basically by taking AACR2, the library cataloguing standard, and then just jamming several archival description fields into the Notes section. Consequently, there are a lot of fields not found in other standards that come straight out of AACR2 and aren't necessarily (in my opinion) well suited for archival description.
The Statement of Responsibility field is one of those. It is typically associated with the formal title of a published work - here is the full rule in RAD:
1.1F1. Transcribe explicit statements of responsibility appearing in conjunction with a formal title proper in or on the chief source of information. Give such statements in the
form in which they appear there.
- Map catalogue [GMD] / Surveys and Mapping Branch
- Iron maiden [GMD] : aces high / by Derek Riggs
- The China study [GMD] / principal investigator, Angus Campbell
- Nouvelle institution nationale [GMD] / par l'auteur des "Vues d'un solitaire patriote"
In your case, I do think that using the RAD template's Dates of creation area would be a better fit. Fortunately, the RAD template has the most flexible Events area, and you can customize the available terms. If you wanted to add a new Event type of "Photography" for example, you can create that term in the Event types taxonomy. The "Display note" field can be set to help control how it appears next to a name - so set the display note as "Photographer" for example:
You can also look at how the other terms are constructed. Once created, it will appear in the Event type drop-down in the Dates of creation widget that pops up when you add new dates/creators in the RAD template.
However, while I do think this is a better use of RAD and AtoM, unfortunately at this time it looks like this might not solve your issue. I discovered this bug ticket - non creator event names are currently not searchable either:
I'm hoping this might be a bug we can address for the 2.6 release. I can't guarantee this, but if your institution would like to sponsor a fix to guarantee its inclusion (and get access to the fix in advance of the next release), feel free to contact me off-list and we can prepare an estimate for you.
We could potentially add the Statement of responsibility field to the search index, but that will also require development.
Cheers,