RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:23:28 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (56 lines)
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Bruce White <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> So the big question - where is the funding going to come from to
> store/protect the records?
>
> I remember having an exchange a few years ago with an archivist at NARA
> about the process for evaluating whether records should be retained as
> permanent.  When I posed the question whether the cost for
> storage/maintenance is considered I was told no - that is someone else's
> problem.  Funding might not have been an issue years ago but in today's
> climate it has to be taken into account IMHO.
>

EXACT same question I asked the 3 NARA folk who were here during our recent
'assessment' =)

This whole effort with the Directive was sort of a two-edged sword.
Initially, it was going to be OMB's effort to evaluate all input and come
up with the goals, which sort of made sense... I mean, management and
budget, right?  Assess the scope of an effort, determine the cost, then
determine if the effort and benefits matched the cost to come up with
realistic goals and timelines.

But early on in the process, NARA convinced SOMEONE that they should take
the lead, because, well... the project involved records, right? But the
WHOLE REASON for the Directive was a lack of proper management of records
by Federal Agencies and a failure to address the need for modernization of
practices.  And who was it that was responsible for this management and
failure to modernize??  Hmmm....

A few of the goals and published objectives result in increasing
authority,  scope and power for NARA, like Part 1,  2.3,  2.5, Part 2 A1,
A2, A3, A4, A5, B1, B2, B4, C1 and C2.  All of these efforts will require
added funding and staff... and if it's in the Directive and OMB
countersigned it, well.... ??

So it's sort of a case of the Fox watching the Henhouse and being given
added funds to do so.  But as Bruce so correctly stated, there is no room
or staff to do this now, and once Agencies transfer permanent records to
NARA for their custodianship,  the costs for managing them become NARA's
responsibility.  How do they intend to absorb this?

Larry
[log in to unmask]


-- 
*Lawrence J. 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]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2