Julie wrote, "I'm trying to find a solution for an ongoing (and in my
opinion, a very serious) problem."

Julie please contact me offline and I will be glad to discuss the approach
we have taken:

[log in to unmask]

Thanks
Blake E.Richardson, CRM


On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Collier, Julie <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Good morning.
>
> I'm trying to find a solution for an ongoing (and in my opinion, a very
> serious) problem. Let me try to explain, without getting into too much
> detail.
>
> In my agency there are 88 record coordinators (for 31 departments) and
> only 2 records management associates. We have 28k boxes in offsite storage.
> I want to identify boxes in storage that have met retention but it's
> difficult to do b/c the record coordinators aren't using meaningful
> descriptions when they put their boxes in storage. Sometimes they don't
> even include a date range. You can imagine how much fun it is trying to
> find something! Insane, right?
>
> I've provided 2 examples:
>
> Instead of incorporating the record series title in their descriptions
> like this: "contracts/leases/agreements: capital improvement: 46-15114;
> C-860042; ML0637; CP0430" they might only enter this description:
>  "46-15114; C-860042; ML0637; CP0430".
> Instead of incorporating the record series title in their descriptions
> like this: "litigation case files: ev box #169" they might only enter this
> for the description: "ev box #169". (No seriously, I wish I was kidding!)
> I want to find a way that ensures every record coordinator starts using
> the record series titles and entering date ranges to describe their
> records. Someone suggested the record coordinators should submit their
> paperwork to me before any boxes go offsite and I haven't ruled this out
> but I have a lot of other work that needs to be done and I can't imagine
> how I'll be able to get it done if we were to implement this.
>
> Here are some ideas I've considered but I would like to hear from others
> if they've implemented something that works! Personally, I think an
> automated system that forces the record coordinators to choose a record
> series title based on specific criteria, etc. would fix this problem but I
> have serious doubts that this agency would consider implementing such a
> system. (Hey, an excel spreadsheet might even do the trick!) The vendor's
> online system has the option of selecting a record series but it would have
> to be selected manually for each individual record and I don't know if
> management would approve the time and effort to do this. And of course,
> there's always training and that has proven to be beneficial (when it
> occurs) but I want to take the guesswork out of the equation for the record
> coordinators - they're not real familiar with the retention schedule/record
> series.
>
> Is anyone else experiencing this problem at their agency? Is there a
> solution?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Julie Collier
>
>
>
> We value your opinion. Please take a few minutes to share your comments on
> the service you received from the District by clicking on this link<
> http://my.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/pg_grp_surveysystem/survey%20ext?pid=1653
> >.
>
> 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]
>

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]