|MSU STRATEGIC INVESTMENT PROPOSAL FOR INSTITUTIONAL PRIORITIES|
|Title||University Records Management Officer||Request Date||2012-12-13|
|Cross Depts||All departments, plus ES and MAES|
|Proposed Dates||Start: May 2013||End:|
|A Records manager for the University should be hired to devise and implement the procedures, disposition scheduling, and storage of all non-current institutional records, both print and electronic. Acting on authority from the university’s central administration, the records manager can effectively direct offices on the proper disposition of records prior to their deposit in the University Records Center and consistently schedule the records for review, destruction, or retention in conformance to guidelines based on those practices by the Records and Information Management Division of the Montana Secretary of State.|
|This proposal is in conformance with the Stewardship Goal: "As steward of a land-grant institution, MSU will responsibly manage its human, physical, economic and environmental resources in an open and sustainable manner." And specifically, it supports the "Metric S.3.2: Efficiency and effectiveness of mission support processes" in that it relates to responsible management of records for the overall business enterprise.|
|COST AND REQUIREMENTS|
|Funding Type:||One-Time Only Funding||Base (3-yr Recurring) Funding|
|FY13||FY14||FY15||Base ($)||OTO Startup ($)||FTE;|
|Materials & Supplies||12000||20000|
|Please comment, if necessary, regarding cost and requirements.||
|Describe the Proposal|
The university presently has no set policy for the management and disposition of its institutional paper and electronic records, and although a facilities services employee has the responsibility for the management of the University Records Center, he has no authority to work with various campus offices for the disposition of their records, records that are constantly being generated. Without a written policy for records retention and disposition, the university is under constant threat of adversarial legal action demanding the retention of records potentially damaging to the institution. A clear policy, consistently enforced, would insure the smooth transition of non-current records to their scheduled destruction or their retention within the university archives. The university cannot be held liable for the destruction of potentially damaging information provided such a policy is in force.
|Describe the broader impacts and benefits of this proposal|
The current state of affairs = we have a 6,000 gsf records management facility that contains ~11,000, 3 cubic foot document storage boxes on 101 steel shelf units. The stored records are not actively managed – the operation currently functions as an unmanaged, limited-access, dead storage facility. Materials include records from many university departments. Only limited records documentation is available – much of it handwritten. Departments may access records by appointment only; no additional records are accepted for storage; and, if records leave the facility they are not re-entered into storage.
The impacts/benefits of implementing this proposal include the following:
The requisite records storage facility already exists and annual building O&M is already covered in the appropriate Facilities Services state budgets. Therefore, implementation consists of the active participation of the University legal counsel, university auditor, university archivist, and CIO.
Assessment measures would include:
|If assessed objectives are not met in the timeframe outlined what is the plan to sunset this proposal?|
I have no suggestion for a "sunset" for this position since records management will be a necessary function of this university as long as it exists. I can see a decreasing need for the management of non-current paper records in the coming decades, and during that time the records manager’s involvement with the Chief Information Officer and the Information Technology Center will increase. Obviously the maintenance of current electronic information is the purview of the Chief Information Officer, and apparently there is no consistent plan in place for its storage once its immediate need for reference is past. As pressing as this need may become, the present problem centers on the legacy of analog data that begs for proper management.
|Dean/Director:||Kenning Arlitsch (email@example.com)|
|Executive/VP:||Martha Potvin (firstname.lastname@example.org)|