58
NARA’s Agency Services Bimonthly Records and Information Discussion Group (BRIDG) Monday, March 30, 2015
| Date post: | 19-Dec-2015 |
| Category: |
Documents |
| Upload: | alfred-mcdowell |
| View: | 214 times |
| Download: | 1 times |
NARA’s Agency Services Bimonthly Records and
Information Discussion Group (BRIDG)
Monday, March 30, 2015
Today’s Meeting Agenda
• Federal Records and Information Maturity Model ~ Cindy Smolovik, Supervisor Records Management Oversight Team
• Expedited Records Schedule Approval Process ~ Rachel Ban Tonkin, Supervisor, Appraisal Team 1 and Margaret Hawkins, Director, Records Management Services
• Developments in Transfers and Disposition ~ Scott Roley, Assistant Director for Operations (T&D), Federal Records Center Program
• Target Audience Analysis Project ~ Gary Rauchfuss, Director, Records Management Training Program
2
Federal RIM Program Maturity Model
Cindy Smolovik, Supervisor, Records Management Oversight Team
The M-12-18 Task
Action Item B (4): Identify a government wide analytical tool to evaluate the effectiveness of records management programs.
How we got here
5
6
7
Performance Levels
Organizing Principles and Elements
8
How to use it• Two files
– Excel Tool Federal Maturity Model Tool.xlsx
– Users’ Guide• Provides advice on using the tool• Principles and elements in a table• Glossary of terms used in the tool• Helpful resources for RIM
9
10
Statement 3-2: Retrieval and AccessibilityThe level to which records and information are easily retrievable and made accessible when needed for agency/component business.
Level 0(a) Records are not consistently retrievable or accessible in a timely manner(b) No defined processes for maintaining records making access and retrieval difficult(c) RIM processes are performed ad hoc(d) No formal definition or classification of records
Level 1(a) Most records can be accessed and retrieved in a timely manner(b) Little/no RIM strategy for access and retrieval with localized management of records(c) RIM processes for maintaining records are starting to be standardized agency/component-wide
Level 2(a) Formal processes exist in order for records to be accessed and retrieved in a timely manner(b) Standardized RIM lifecycle processes have been developed across the agency/component making access and retrieval of records more reliable(c) Standardized processes for access and retrieval are beginning to be promulgated across the agency/component
Level 3(a) Processes for identification and classification of records are standardized across the agency/component making access and retrieval reliable(b) Records are usually accessed and retrieved in a timely manner
Level 4(a) Records identification and classification processes are documented and integrated with agency/component business/mission at the strategic level in order for records to be accessed and retrieved in a timely manner(b) Records definitions have been developed at the agency/component level making access and retrieval accurate and efficient(c) All records are accessed and retrieved whenever needed in a timely manner
Notes:
Assessment:
Level 3 - Engaged 3
11
Maturity Summary
Domain 1: Management Support and Organizational Structure
Statement Level Score
1-1: Strategic Planning Level 0 - Absent 0.0
1-2: Leadership and Management Level 2 - Functioning 2.0
1-3: Resources Level 1 -Developing 1.0
1-4: Awareness Level 1 -Developing 1.0
Domain 1 Maturity Score: 1.0
Domain 2: Policy, Standards, and Governance
Statement Level Score
2-1: Policy, Standards, and Governance Framework Level 0 - Absent 0.0
2-2: Compliance Monitoring Level 0 - Absent 0.0
2-3: Risk Management Level 1 -Developing 1.0
2-4: Communications Level 1 -Developing 1.0
2-5: Internal Controls Level 2 - Functioning 2.0
Domain 2 Maturity Score: 0.8
Domain 3: RIM Program Operations
Statement Level Score
3-1: Lifecycle Management Level 3 - Engaged 3.0
3-2: Retrieval and Accessibility Level 3 - Engaged 3.0
3-3: Integration Level 2 - Functioning 2.0
3-4: Security and Protection Level 3 - Engaged 3.0
3-5: Training Level 1 -Developing 1.0
Domain 3 Maturity Score: 2.4
Composite Maturity Score: 1.4
Next Steps
12
Improving the Current Request
for Records Disposition Authority Process
March 30, 2015Rachel Ban Tonkin, Supervisor, Appraisal Team 1
Laurence Brewer. Director, NRMP
Introduction The OMB/NARA Memorandum M‐12‐18 Managing
Government Records Directive Action C1 (MGRD‐C1) directs NARA to “Improve the Current Request for Records Disposition Authority Process” stating:
By December 31, 2015, NARA will improve the current Request for Records Disposition Authority process. Consistent with current Federal records management statutes, or with changes to existing statutes (if required), NARA will also develop criteria that agencies can apply to the scheduling, appraisal, and overall management of temporary records that can be effectively monitored with appropriate NARA oversight.
15
Methodology• Focus
– Clearly temporary records• Benchmarking
– Domestic and international/Federal and state agencies, focusing on differences in how agencies implement the records scheduling process
– Federal procedures that permit direct reporting by agencies including• Privacy Impact Assessments (PIA) • System of Records Notices (SORN) • Delegated examining authority used by OPM
16
Current Process• Agencies currently request disposition authority
for records in the following categories:– Permanent
•Records that NARA considers to have archival value– Context dependent records
•Records may be appraised as permanent records in one agency and as temporary for another agency
– Clearly Temporary•Records that ultimately have little or no use beyond
the day‐to‐day operation of the agency.– GRS exceptions
•NARA approval is required to extend or shorten GRS retention period
17
Two Proposed Approaches• Delegated Disposition Authority
– Agencies have the authority to approve some or all temporary records
– NARA is not pursuing this option
• Expedited Approval Process– Provide a fast track schedule process that
agencies can use to identify and schedule clearly temporary records
– NARA is pursuing this option
18
Proposed Delegated Disposition Authority
• NARA is not pursuing this option
• Modeled on the OPM delegated examining authority.
• Regular audits/inspections and recertification process would provide mechanisms for NARA to maintain its oversight role
• Scope could range from
– Disposal of all temporary records, or– Limited to a NARA-defined subset
19
Proposed Delegated Disposition Authority Program
• Training– Agency staff would need intensive training in
•Records appraisal•Developing an internal disposition approval process•Documenting disposition decisions•Crafting notices for the Federal Register
– NARA would need to significantly expand training program
• Audits, Reporting, and Inspections– Initial inspection to determine eligibility for delegated authority– Audits on 3 year cycles to maintain delegated authority– Agency annual reports summarizing delegated authority
activities– Requires NARA program staff and additional FTE for audits and
inspection20
Proposed Delegated Disposition Authority
• Reasons to not pursue this option– Small volume of eligible records– GRS expansions will reduce volume of eligible
records– Potential limited buy-in from interested agencies
because agencies would lose legal cover from a NARA-approved disposition authority
– Public/government perception of NARA abdication of oversight role
– Resource limitations – Number of sufficiently robust agency records
management programs resourced to carry this out21
Expedited Approval Process Pilot
• Builds on past work on improving the process, including:– Emphasis on reducing and eliminating the
backlog– Requiring agencies and NARA to follow
regulation requirements for schedules to be accepted for processing
– Improvements to the internal NARA stakeholder review for record schedules
– Cross-team sharing of schedules to manage ebbs and flows in agency schedule submissions and staffing changes
22
Expedited Approval Process Pilot
• NARA‐controlled approval process for clearly temporary records.– Pilot began October 1, 2014– Soft roll out to test process
• Process most appropriate for previously unscheduled records
• We will re-evaluate application and scope of the questionnaire based on pilot experience
23
Expedited Approval Process Pilot• Clearly Temporary Records Questionnaire (NA-
13175)– Checkbox form to determine if records qualify for
expedited approval as clearly temporary records– Form designed to elicit the information needed to
make an informed appraisal decision– No appraisal memo will be written– Schedules will not be forwarded to NARA
stakeholders for review– Clearly temporary records do not require an
appraisal meeting– Used as a data source for future GRS items
24
Expedited Approval Process Pilot
• NARA appraisal archivist vets schedule against the questionnaire– If satisfactory
•NARA simultaneously registers the job and prepares a Federal Register notice
– If substantial additional information is needed or a significant challenge is posed through the Federal Register comment process, then the schedule goes through the full process (NARA internal stakeholder review and appraisal memo)
25
Expedited Approval Process Pilot
• Can be completed by agency or appraiser
• Appraiser reviews agency responses, and may request clarification
• If records are inappropriate for the process, appraiser will notify agency
26
Expedited Approval Process Pilot
• General information plus question on records in FRC, and whether records are covered by the GRS
27
Expedited Approval Process Pilot
28
• Laws that dictate disposition periods• Rescheduling records• Government records standardization caveat
Expedited Approval Process Pilot
29
• Permanent and temporary records are interrelated
• Relationship to permanent records requires extra review
• Records provide a tool for accessing permanent records
Expedited Approval Process Pilot
30
• Types of records that are generally, but not always, appraised as permanent.
• Warrant internal NARA stakeholder review
Expedited Approval Process Pilot
• http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/scheduling/expedited-faq.html
31
Federal Records Centers Program National Transfer and
Disposition Program
BRIDGMarch 30, 2015
National T&D Team
Teams and Roles• Scott Roley
– Assistant Director for Operations (T&D)
• Russell Loiselle– National T&D
Coordinator– Acting TIL
Coordinator
• Patrick Weigel– National Disposition
Coordinator
New to the Team• Catherine Nolan• Michael O’Connor• Stephanie Montgomery
Applying approved schedules to FRC holdings
Roley , Weigel
Applying and lifting disposition “freezes”
Loiselle, Roley
Authorized agency disposal approvers
Account Managers, Weigel, Loiselle
Specialized ARCIS queries Weigel, Roley
Agency Assistance Team assignments
National T&D – Services and Roles
NT&D Planning Priorities, 2013-2015
• ARCIS disposition authority updates
• Disposition processes• Permanent, unscheduled and
“other” records• Disposal backlog• Frozen records
NT&D Planning Priorities, 2013-2015
• ARCIS disposition updates• Disposition processes• Permanent, unscheduled and “other”
records• Disposal backlog• Frozen records
Tobacco Industry Litigation (TIL) lift
ARCIS
• Disposition Authority Table– 16,000 validated authorities– 80% of all transfers and 83% of
transfers eligible for destruction in July 2015 complete
• Business Intelligence (BI) deployed– Identify collection anomalies– Provide standard reports
Disposal Review Report
TIL Disposal
Disposal Process
• Vision– Remote process through ARCIS
• FRCP procedures in place• Agency “To Be”
– Simplify process, hold down cost, retain reliability• Validated 13001s mailed after single review• Flagged and returned approved 13001s receive full
review
– Agency partners in disposal• Quality review process
March 25: Agency Disposition Profile
• Backlog– Includes separate figures for TIL– Limited backlog disposal projects continue
• Clarifies Unscheduled and other records– “Limbo” codes
• Pending Agency Action, Archival Sample, Deferred Reappraisal Pending, Unscheduled
– M-12-18, Goal 2.5• 13,000 Unscheduled transfers with disposition
authority moved to Pending Agency Action
Agency Profile
General Records Schedules
• Issue: agency manuals• Agencies to incorporate within six
months of issuance• Temporarily resolved through
ARCIS analysis• Contacting agencies to convert to
DAA-GRS-2013-0003-0001
TIL-lift Plan
TIL-lift Plan
• 12 million cubic feet under TIL• 2.2 million cubic feet immediately
disposable• 190,000 transfers immediately
disposable• 800,000+ cubic feet proposed for
disposal in first two quarters (60+ cubic feet) or as arranged through agency feedback
TIL-lift Plan
• Balance FRCP capacity and agency flexibility
• Consider FY 2015/2016 (and beyond) budgets
• Feedback proved as expected• Early FY 2016 budget commitment
can mean earlier disposal and greater savings
TIL: Agency Point-of-View
• Budget available for FY 2015– If 60+ transfers, move to July cycle– Potential agency-specific Terms and Conditions
• Budget not available until FY 2016– If 60+ transfers, move to October cycle– Potential agency-specific Terms and Conditions
• Budget or other barrier to TIL-lift disposal– Discuss with Account Manager
TIL: Disposal Lessons Learned
• Agency disposal review process– Centralized or other– Update assignments– Identify litigation and other holds– Provide training
• FRCP assistance– Account Manager reports– Alternatives to signed NAF 13001
Managing Government Records DirectiveGoal 2.3 Data
• Disclaimer – Agency Records Officers certificate data is a moving target
• 261 designated AROs• 85% are in compliance• GAO requested by name report for numerous
agencies
52
Future Records Management Learning Center
53
Course catalogTest item/Test repository
Performance Support catalogTask catalog
Collaboration/Knowledge Management Center
Course catalogTest item/Test repository
Performance Support catalogTask catalog
Collaboration/Knowledge Management Center
SAO
PMs
CIO/IT Staff
RL/RC
ARO
Everyone
IGs
Legal Staff
Tasks
Conduct RM Inspection
Use ERA
Complete RMSA
KA Courses
Training Courses
RM Certificate
Performance Support Tools
Other Training Resources
Collaboration Center
Education – information about RM
Training – how to do RM tasks
Target Audience Analysis
Audience Groups• Senior Agency Officials• Agency Records Officers• Records liaisons, custodians• Everyone• CIO/IT staff• Program managers• Legal• IGs
Audience Description• Characteristics• Background knowledge• Motivation• RM responsibilities• RM performance goals
54
Face-to-face and virtual focus group events to understand your RM learning needs.
Focus Group Schedule
55
Date Time Target Audience Audience Location12/10/2014 1:00-3:00 Agency Records Officers DC - A1 (BRIDG)3/3/2015 1:00-3:00 Records Liaison Officers DC3/4/2015 1:00-3:00 Records Liaison Officers Outside DC3/24/2015 1:00-3:00 Information Technology Staff DC3/26/2015 1:00-3:00 Information Technology Staff Outside DC3/30/2015 1:00-3:00 Agency Records Officers DC - A1 (BRIDG)3/31/2015 1:00-3:00 Office of General Counsel DC4/2/2015 1:00-3:00 Office of General Counsel Outside DC4/15/2015 1:00-3:00 Agency Records Officers DC - A1 (BRIDG)
All times are eastern.
Face to face session
Virtual session
Completed session
• Need more participation from IT staff and program managers• One-on-one interviews are an option
Points of Contact
Jill Snyder [email protected]
Gary [email protected](301) 837-1710 or (301) 310-3487
56
Reminder: Meet and Greet/Focus Group
1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. in the Jefferson Room (Mezzanine level)
•The Post-BRIDG Appraisal Team Meet and Greet ~ Hosted by Appraisal Team 3
•Target Audience Analysis Focus Group ~ Conducted by NARA’s National Records Management Training program
57
BRIDG FY 2015 Meeting Dates
* Go to http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/meetings/#dates for BRIDG meeting listing
58
Date LocationApril 15, 2015 McGowan TheaterJune 17, 2015 McGowan Theater
August 19, 2015 McGowan Theater
