130 likes | 148 Views
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
E N D
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 • Integrated with University Archives • No Storage
RMP Challenges • Large number of campus units • Decentralization of University hierarchy • Lack of resources • Education / Training • Low priority
The Evaluation • Survey on web of unit liaisons • Focus group discussions • Interviews • Comparison to other RM programs
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
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
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
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
Liaison Focus Group • “Lack of time” theme • High levels of frustration • Unanimous dissatisfaction with office records • Desire to do “what is right”
Interviews • Dr. Ed Southern, State Records Center of North Carolina • Dr. William Saffady, records management author, consultant, and professor at Long Island University
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
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
Evaluation Summary • Gathered helpful information about RMP on campus • Learned about programs at other universities • Strengthened the RMP Program