>
>
> I don't disagree with your assessment about how much work is involved in
> this project. However, the board members will be actively participating with
> the consultant to carry out the project objectives so the "heavy lifting"
> will be shared. As noted in the RFP, much of the information for the
> clearinghouse already exists; we need someone to pull it altogether.
> Creating the brochure is another minor part of the project. The big item, of
> course, is developing the records management workshop. Maybe we're being
> unrealistic here, but we estimated that working full-time for three weeks
> (15 work days), the consultant could develop the workshop materials in
> partnership with selected members of the board. Another three days of time
> would be invested in teaching the workshops.
>
> I realize that many consultants typically work for more than $400 per day,
> but we are limited by NHPRC guidelines.


Laren-

Reading the RFP doesn't indicate the limitred scope you hav portrayed in
this message and possibly the RFP should be rewritten to clearly state what
it is the Consultant is expected to do.  Having spent 9 years as an RM
Consultant in the areas of business process re-engineering, disaster
preparedness, planning and recovery and vital records protection program
development, I read it similar to John and Graham.  The RFP doesn't give
anyone a warm fuzzy feeling that what you've stated here is all someone
would have to do, or that the 'heavy lifting' as you referred to it has been
done.

   3.1     To establish a clearinghouse of information about archives and
records                   management
  3.2     To develop a basic workshop on records management for local
governments and other repositories
  3.3     To offer the basic records management workshop at selected sites
around the state
  3.4     To create a general information brochure about the value of
records management for distribution to city and county officials and other
repositories
  3.5     To develop a program supporting the reactivation of county
historical records commissions

The above 5 subjects indicate a need to ESTABLISH the clearinghouse, and
although the information already exists it isn't in any solid form and it
isn't necessarily related to State, County, or City government record
keeping. There is no clear indication of the content desired for the
workshops, or that funding will be provided outside of the Grant money to
produce the workbooks or materials for the workshop.  Depending on the
location of the workshops, although they are one day in length, it may take
two days to deliver each one including travel to and from the sites.  There
is a requirement to attend CHRAB  meetings as directed, but no indication of
where these are located or how frequently they occur.  There is a desire for
a brochure for city and county officials and other repositories, but no
indication of what these other repositories are... and isn't it the States
responsibility to ensure these officials are AWARE OF THE VALUE of records
management and their LEGAL OBLIGATION to meet the requirements as a part of
their job?  And the last item, to develop a program to support the
reactivation of county HRCs alone would take all of the funds the grant has
to offer.

Also, the scope isn't clear as to whether the Consultant is setting best
practices for record keeping at all of these three levels, but it makes
reference to them all.  Nor is there an indication of what existing
practices are to determine what gaps exist between those and what would be
considered "state of the art" best practices.

While I understand the scope of the NHPRC grant may be very specific and
there are limitations,. in most cases organizations understand that the
grant funding is looked at as seed money to developing improved practices
and systems and not intended to remedy identified problem areas.  The State
of California would need to make a major commitment of effort and funds to
resolve the dismal state of record keeping that exists and given the current
financial picture in California, I doubt that will happen.

To me, although this is well intentioned, it's $11k down the drain and won't
remedy anything... it will simply result in a large stack of brochures
pointing out the obvious problem, a series of three classes that will cost
more for attendees to travel to than the consultant will earn delivering
them, and a lot of State employees shaking their heads asking "How do they
expect us to accomplish any of this?" because of insufficient funding.

Larry
-- 
Larry Medina
Danville, CA
RIM Professional since 1972

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]