LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 15.5

Help for RECMGMT-L Archives


RECMGMT-L Archives

RECMGMT-L Archives


View:

Next Message | Previous Message
Next in Topic | Previous in Topic
Next by Same Author | Previous by Same Author
Chronologically | Most Recent First
Proportional Font | Monospaced Font

Options:

Join or Leave RECMGMT-L
Reply | Post New Message
Search Archives


Subject: Re: Scanning Procedures
From: Christine Figueroa <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:Mon, 5 Apr 2010 09:02:34 -0700
Content-Type:text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
Parts/Attachments

text/plain (106 lines)


Hi Nolene,

Hope you are doing well.

This is a huge endeavor and I do not envy the position you are in. I will be
in the same position soon.

If I could, let me share some of the challenges I have encountered in the
hopes that it is useful:

   - Often times the scanners that are purchased for users cannot
   accommodate standards. You might want to check with your IT colleagues to
   see if the basic standards are even possible.
   - Metadata requirements for scanned images get overlooked often and, if
   users do not have naming conventions, they may use another tool to track
   what is being scanned. Additionally, it may pose some challenges when the
   records have met disposition.
   - If any of your documents require a wet signature, you may find that the
   paper records may need to be kept longer or you may even wish to consider
   holding on to a subset of your paper records that have long term retention
   (over 5 years) or that you may wish to have as part of your archives
   (historical records).

I happen to be partial to porridge.

I look forward to future conversations.

Best,






On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Nolene Sherman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I have been up to my eyeballs working with a consultant conducting data
> gathering interviews for our enterprise-wide retention schedule -- a totally
> from scratch endeavor. I have found that many of our functions/offices are
> scanning paper documents, and in some cases destroying the paper -- not a
> bad thing in and of itself. However, when asked if they have written
> scanning procedures and QC, they, to a one, have said that no such thing
> exists. When asked what type of QC they do, I just get a blank stare.
>
> We have never had the authenticity of any scanned documents called into
> question in court, so our attorneys aren't too alarmed by the lack of
> procedures. However, in my mind, that is a huge red-flag, so I am planning
> on issuing a scanning policy. It will be either a stand-alone policy or
> included in the overall records management policy. The consultant suggested
> that I not create an actual procedure, but instead just say scanning
> procedures must be documented and publish minimum scanning standards (DPI,
> etc). I am concerned that, since virtually all users seemed totally clueless
> about the need for such a procedure, that they wouldn't know where to begin.
> So I am contemplating a policy that states that, in order to be able to
> destroy the originals after scanning, a documented procedure must be in
> place which covers document preparation steps, scanning steps, QC steps and
> percentage of documents selected for QC and how that selection is made (i.e.
> every 20th document, first and last 20 documents, or whatever). Should their
> procedures state how long they keep the originals after scanning -- I'd
> expect to see around 90 days to 6 months. I'm thinking that each unit may
> have different internal issues that may affect how long is prudent to keep
> originals before destroying. Or should that be a blanket timeframe in the
> retention schedule?
>
> Of course, once that is done, I'll have to work with compliance to add that
> to some audit cycle, but I'm thinking it should be a pretty simple watch
> them scan a batch and see if what they are doing matches what they say they
> are doing. I am thinking the standards themselves will be separate since
> technology will change faster than the need to change general procedures.
>
> I often have to check myself to make sure I don't get too detailed. If the
> attorneys aren't concerned, should I be? Do I not give people enough credit
> to be able to figure out how to document their procedure on their own? Or,
> on the other hand, do I not go far enough?
>
> So, is my porridge too hot, too cold, or juuuust right?
>
>
> Nolene Sherman
> [log in to unmask]
> Orange County, CA
>
> Tracking where records are kept is what Tiggers and Records Managers do
> best!
>
>
> 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]
>



-- 
Christine M. Figueroa, MLIS, CRM

[log in to unmask]
714.402.9110

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]

Back to: Top of Message | Previous Page | Main RECMGMT-L Page

Permalink



LISTS.UFL.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager