>We as a county have been wrestling with the pro's and cons of centralized
>scanning for a while.

One of the greatest benefits of performing this type of function in a
centralized setting is the "economy of scale" that can be achieved by using
a common space and purchasing one set of hardware and software to perform
the work.  Another benefit is the greater potential for consistency of the
work being performed, seeing as it's being done by a unified workforce.

>Has anyone done a study of this they could share?

Not a study specifically of this, but many of us (I'm sure) have been
involved with the management of images scanned by a variety  of sources and
then placed into a single system and have seen what happens when the
standards, processes or procedures were drastically different, and none of
the experiences have been "ideal".

>We have issues with some departments unwilling to send out documents for
>scanning due to sensitivity of information.

Consider establishing a contract with a third-party firm and providing them
the space to do it in-house, using their staff and equipment.  This not
only keep your source documents on-site and available during the
conversion, but allows you to periodically audit the handling of the
materials and keep the vendor from assuming responsibility for the
off-hours security and privacy of the materials.

>While others are unwilling due to having to prepare the documents for
>scanning and then having to verify the accuracy afterwards, they feel that
>it would be just as easy to scan the documents themselves.

News flash for these folks... no matter WHO does the work, you'll STILL
have to do the QC. =)  You need to establish a threshold for verification
of the accuracy of the work being done, and as your level of confidence
rises, the threshold for verification can be lowered.  But no matter what,
you NEVER put the responsibility for the QC or verification of images with
the individual/firm performing the work.

As far as the prep work goes, this is the most costly part of the
process.  There are ways to handle this to minimize the costs, but there's
no way around it.  You can hire temp staff and train them on how to handle
the materials to keep them in order and have them also be trained by the
service bureau performing the scanning to insert slip sheets for indexing,
etc. during the prep, but this is where you'll spend 60-70% of your money
(outside of hardware costs).

>The cost of equipment I can compare fairly easily.  I'm mostly interested
>in where other organizations centralize the scanning such as which
>department and what success they have in other departments buying into the
>concept.

The buy in is something that comes up-front.  You get someone to champion
the effort, and then others are informed that it's happening... it's not a
matter of choice, it's a mater of policy and procedure when it
happens.  Funding must be secured in advance to take on a project of this
type, and it's good to point to some success stories, so look to other
Local Government agencies for these.

I know Alameda County (CA) did a major scanning project on a series of
files and is building on that success.  You may want to contact NAGARA and
see if they can point to some other entities that have done this
recently.  It seems like there's a story in RAIN every week or two about
someone in city or county government doing this.

Larry

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance