1 / 13

Evaluating a University Records Management Program

Evaluating a University Records Management Program. Brenda Beasley Research Assistant. Timothy R. Sanford Assistant Provost. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. ECURE 2001. Background. The Records Management Program Custom Schedules Unit Liaisons

morse
Download Presentation

Evaluating a University Records Management Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluating a University Records Management Program Brenda Beasley Research Assistant Timothy R. Sanford Assistant Provost The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill ECURE 2001

  2. Background The Records Management Program • Custom Schedules • Unit Liaisons • Integrated with University Archives • No Storage

  3. RMP Challenges • Large number of campus units • Decentralization of University hierarchy • Lack of resources • Education / Training • Low priority

  4. The Evaluation • Survey on web of unit liaisons • Focus group discussions • Interviews • Comparison to other RM programs

  5. Liaison Survey Results • 27% Total response rate (138/500) • 63% have found RMP to be at least somewhat helpful • 55% have Work Plans that do not include their liaison responsibilities • 44% spend at least 1 hour per week on RM

  6. Liaison Survey Results,cont. • 60% are at least somewhat satisfied with their Schedule • Of the liaisons with Schedules, 82% attempt to use it • Most common written response: lack of time • 53% reported a need for additional storage space

  7. Liaison SurveySummary • Most liaisons report the training sessions to be helpful • Liaisons often found retention schedules difficult to understand • Many liaisons continue to practice poor records management

  8. Liaison SurveyMisconceptions • RM is an extraneous activity • Disregard for NC Public Records Law • Using lack of storage as an excuse • Lack of familiarity with the volatility of electronic formats

  9. Liaison Focus Group • “Lack of time” theme • High levels of frustration • Unanimous dissatisfaction with office records • Desire to do “what is right”

  10. Interviews • Dr. Ed Southern, State Records Center of North Carolina • Dr. William Saffady, records management author, consultant, and professor at Long Island University

  11. Survey of Peer InstitutionsGoals • Trace common approaches • Identify current trends • Develop a profile of successful practices • Learn how other institutions are dealing with electronic records

  12. Survey of Peer InstitutionsFindings • 68% use customized schedules • 48% offer training programs • 76% combine archives and records management • 88% offer records storage • 40% have guidelines for electronic records

  13. Evaluation Summary • Gathered helpful information about RMP on campus • Learned about programs at other universities • Strengthened the RMP Program

More Related