Andrew:
You have challenges any way you go, because they are truly permanent
records. No matter what the format, you'll need to properly store and
maintain the records. Let's review your choices:
1) As-Is: Paper storage costs are usually pretty low, and, since you have
electronic convenience copies, the access rate is going to be low. Safe (if
storage is proper) and long-term.
2) Image: You need to go through our state's imaging system approval
process, but while an annoyance, will ensure that you are keeping things
properly today. After that the paper isn't needed. Can't be all that
expensive.
3) Film: If your images are of good enough quality, you should be able to
generate your film via technology (ImageWriter). Still you need to have
silver masters and diazo copies, keep them in the proper environments and
check them regularly. At several cents per page plus the environmental and
maintenance costs I think that this is the most expensive. Plus it may be
hard to locate a document, and you need to keep filming every year.
I'd get quotes locally to plug in, but (2) looks lowest cost to me. (Don't
forget to budget for annual review and future system conversion, plus make
sure that your backups are tested regularly!)
I know that this is basic, but I hope that it helps.
Bernard Chester, CDIA+, EDP, ICP, AIIM MIT
Principal
IMERGE Consulting, Pacific Northwest Office
7683 SE 27 Street, #316
Mercer Island, WA 98040
(office) 206-230-9253
(cell) 206-979-7389
mailto:[log in to unmask]
web: http://www.imergeconsult.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Penta, Andrew
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 2:03 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [RM] Cost comparisons
Hello, I'm fairly new to the list, and this is my first inquiry posting.
I have enjoyed reading and have learned much from what I have seen the list
membership post, and I'm certain that I will be appreciative of any feedback
I receive from this question.
I am looking for cost comparisons, or a cost-benefit analysis comparing
microfilming files rather than continuing to store paper in boxes.
Specifically, a large department I work with has digitally scanned thousands
of permanent retention official public records, but has not invested in
producing preservation microfilm back-up for the scanned images. By law in
the State of Washington, to be able to destroy the paper source documents of
permanent files, the files must be filmed, regardless if thy are scanned (or
you can go through a complex process to have your scanning system certified
by the state, which would remove the requirement to microfilm). I'm
thinking that it would be more economical (and less risky) to produce
microfilm directly from the scanned digital images and destroy the paper
files, than to continue to store an ever increasing volume of paper, and now
I'm looking for information on the costs to strengthen my case.
Andrew Penta
Records Officer
Records Management Division,
Clark County General Services Dept.
ext. 4009, or (360) 397-2191
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
