Kansas State Historical Records Advisory Board

June 26, 2008

Members Present: Anthony Crawford, Donald Brace, Duncan Friend, Marc Galbraith, Matt Veatch, Sheryl Williams, and Pat Michaelis.

Others: Scott Leonard, Kris Graves.

Pat called the Meeting to order at 10 a.m. Since new support staff was in attendance, Pat asked the members to introduce themselves.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

Pat asked whether there were any additions or corrections to the minutes of the September 6, 2007, meeting and apologized that the minutes were in an outline rather than in narrative form. Don moved to accept; Matt seconded. The motion passed.

NHPRC Issues

Pat updated the board on matters relating to the National Historical Publications and Records Commission’s financial situation (especially pertinent because the NHPRC is KSHRAB’s funding body). Pat relayed that, just this morning, she received an email indicating, nay celebrating, that the US House of Representatives’ Appropriation Committee completed the markup of a bill including NHPRC and NARA funding for Fiscal Year 2009—complete funding of $10 million for NHPRC. This amount was originally in doubt, but NHPRC (and its advocates) successfully fought to have the full amount reinstated.

Projects to Expend Remaining Grant Funds

KSHRAB requested, and received, an extension—through the end of the calendar year—to spend the remaining grant funds. (This is in addition to the SNAP grant the board received; see below.) Of the projects suggested for use on the remaining funds, NHPRC informed us that they were all eligible except for creating an online directory of historical records repositories.

To complete aspects of other projects that require mailings to records repositories, addresses for records repositories still need to be gathered and we will manage them in a database.

Follow-up to the Basic Archives workshops

One of the ideas that had been submitted for the remaining funds was to hold follow-up session to the Basic Archives workshops which will assist participants in writing collecting policies, declarations of gift, finding aids, reference and copying policies, etc.). NHPRC likes the idea of this kind of follow-up. These would probably be led by those familiar with the original workshops, therefore the bulk of the work would necessarily fall on Sherry, Tony and KHS staff. While, logistically, much organizational work still needs to be done, the board was very receptive to the follow-up workshop proposal (especially the principals, Sherry and Tony). Matt asked about the project’s target audience. The board settled on the prerequisite that attendees came to one of first three original workshops; there are probably enough funds remaining to enable the board to cover attendees’ travel expenses.

Statewide Electronic Records Conference

Another project that had been identified to use the remaining KSHRAB board grant funds was an electronic records conference. However, other factors led to a refocusing of KSHS efforts and the Electronic Records and Information Management Dialogue (described below) was the result.

Included in the Governor’s original budget proposal for FY 2008 was an enhancement for the Kansas Historical Society—$200,000 for planning the effective management/storage of state government electronic records. As part of this planning process, KHS orchestrated a one-day conference on the matter.

Matt recapped the effort for the board: The Electronic Records and Information Management Dialogue was held in Topeka on the morning of May 8, 2008. The response was great; 24 of 25 invitees, from both state and local government, attended. The emphasis was not on providing a how-to type of conference, but rather on raising awareness with business leaders and decisions makers at all levels of state government (rather than just the IT community).

Lynn Carlin (KSU), Beth Warner (KU), John Carlin, L. Reynolds Cahoon and KHS staff jointly planned the event, but John Carlin was vital on a much larger level, too. As both former Governor and Archivist of the United States, Mr. Carlin, also the event’s introductory speaker, brought cache, perspective and the main theme, that “Records Matter.” Mr. Cahoon was the keynote speaker, commenting on current ER&IM realities and recommendations for sustainable practices, as well as facilitating a lively and productive discussion amongst the attendees. Those in attendance concluded that though Kansas had made much progress here (particularly in terms of guidance, awareness and Enterprise Technical Architecture), many challenges remain. Attendees also committed to working on a common roadmap (that is, an action plan) toward more effective ER&IM practices for state-wide use; KHS will lead this planning process, relying heavily on the input of additional partners by establishing an advisory group/steering committee (to “plan the plan”). KSHRAB should play a role in this advisory group (Don Brace?).

Sherry raised the issue of KSHRAB’s overall communication/efforts/cohesiveness; specifically, she would like to have been more involved in the E-Recs Dialogue. Duncan wants to bottle that sentiment—we will need it later on. Pat apologized for the lapse in communication and explained the general (and rather organic) development process for the Dialogue; though it sprouted from goals originally espoused in KSHRAB meetings, the conference quickly took on a life of its own. Pat further explained that (thanks to the SNAP grant funding; see below for further discussion) the board now has funding for a p/t position for the next 18 months—to help facilitate and follow through on initial ideas, logistics, gathering and analyzing info, drafting things, communicating on matters like this, etc. Don suggested that, to his mind, the KSHRAB board is more advisory in nature rather than directly hands-on but individual board members ought to play a part in other related advisory committees, too. Matt acknowledged Don’s thoughts, but expressed skepticism as to how many advisory committees, steering committees, and the like could operate simultaneously, and effectively. Duncan observed that everyone is overextended, and it’s extremely difficult to serve as a “representative” voice for an entity or group of people—to serve both the board and your home community; we’re all volunteers here, so to speak.

Matt returned the conversation to future planning, reminding the board that this current budget enhancement is a 2 year project, and that we definitely need to include a couple of voices in the planning (and, as Pat recalled, determine whether it’s expressly a KSHRAB project; this determination basically comes down to whether the board wants to claim a founding role in getting this thing going). Matt remarked on the difficulty of figuring out who exactly should be the voices we solicit regarding the budget enhancement: how do we figure out—and involve—the right people in this planning process? (In this vein, Matt reminded the board that the E-Recs Dialogue was an effort to branch out to people we don’t normally speak with. Perhaps that fact is why it’s a little cloudy about whether it was a KSHRAB project even though it achieved many of the goals laid out at the board’s last meeting.) Once the question of whether KSHRAB is a “working” board presented itself, the decision was made to move on to the next item on the agenda.

Before moving on, Pat suggested that perhaps once new members come on to KSHRAB, the board should arrange a retreat of some kind to establish and define expectations and common understanding for the coming term. (And there’s a bit of money still needing to be spent.) Such an event could be prove effective at ameliorating past communication deficiencies as well as provide an opportunity to re-visit KSHRAB’s strategic plan. It is not known exactly which members might soon be turning over, though the retreat can certainly still be planned in the meantime. (Don is retiring, and thus won’t be seeking another appointment; Sally might be up, and Peggy, too, perhaps.) Pat distributed a list of current board members, though it remained unclear exactly when each term expires—or started, for that matter.

Vital Records Identification Workshop

As Pat informed the board, the idea for a workshop on identifying Vital Records was borne of a KHS staff member’s attendance of a similar workshop offered by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). As the proposed workshop would probably rely most heavily on KHS staff, Pat (and others at KHS) would need to check with staff to determine whether it’s currently a feasible project. KSHS offered it to the records officers last fall and the curriculum needs some modification.

Pat sees a lot of overlap between the proposed Vital Records workshop and a similar offering, the Council of State Archivists’ (CoSA) Intergovernmental Preparedness for Essential Records (IPER) training program. Matt then reviewed the IPER project.

Disaster Preparedness Projects

Via a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant, CoSA is offering a training program geared at emergency preparations for state and local government. Utilizing a “train the trainer” type of model, the IPER program will focus primarily on essential records (different nomenclature, but same as vital records) and records-related emergency planning and response through the online delivery on two instructor-led “webinars” (seminars offered over the internet) per state. The timeline for the 3-year program is as follows: April-July 2008, pre-assessment work; July 2008, IPER summit meeting in Atlanta; August 2008-July 2009, curriculum development and formation of instructional teams; August 2009-May 2010, train-the-trainer institutes and webinars in each state; Fall 2010, post-assessment.

Per Pat’s suggestion, the board decided to defer the original Vital Records workshop and allow it to be subsumed under the seemingly more expansive IPER offering. Doing so would allow the board to re-allocate the funds previously assigned to the workshop to an energetic promotion of National Archives Month, coming up in October. (Such a decision is, of course, pending final approval by NHPRC. But, as several other SHRAB’s are conducting similar campaigns on behalf of Archives Month with NHPRC’s blessing, the approval process is anticipated to be largely pro-forma.)

Archives Month

The first step in any official KSHRAB activities for Archives Month is contacting NHPRC to request a change in the use of KSHRAB monies. (Pat will do this ASAP.) Then, there lots of potential ideas: including posters and/or other printed materials, one of which should focus exclusively on disaster planning and response; promotion of a general theme for KSHRAB efforts—“why are records important to you?” or, maybe, John Carlin’s “records matter;” promotion/potential subsidization of the CoSA publication by David Carmichael, Rescuing Family Records; establishment of a dedicated Website for Archives Month (discussion of whether the site should stand alone, a al ksarchivesmonth.com, or be hosted by the Historical Society, i.e. kshs.org/archivesmonth); and the construction/maintenance of a mailing list.

In order to facilitate/organize board efforts for Archives Month, Sherry offered to chair a special sub-committee; Tony and Kris signed on to help as well. The board will hear the sub-committee’s proposal(s) by the end of July. The budget for Archives Month activities should be roughly $10-12,000.

SNAP Grant Implementation

Pat explained how the State and National Archival Partnership (SNAP) grant process works. (Most notably, the process is marked by less paperwork and formality than other grant programs.) The purpose of the SNAP grant program is to build a national archival network by strengthening archives and historical records programs in each of the states; under these auspices, KSHRAB received the maximum amount—$20,000.

This budget includes funds for 4 board meetings over an 18-month period; at least one Basic Archives workshop; and the development of a new strategic plan for the board. To facilitate the planning process, one half-time Planning Coordinator position will be hired and other funds will be used for meetings for up to 3 focus groups; staff and board travel expenses; printing costs, etc. The bulk of the monies go to the Planning Coordinator position (roughly $12,500 out of $20,000), whose efforts will be centered exclusively on servicing the board and its strategic plan (that is, surveying records repositories statewide, gathering information through focus groups and task forces, and other logistical duties for the entire 18 months).

Council of State Archivists

Pat provided the board with a bit of background on the Council of State Archivists (CoSA) before delving into the particulars of the Preserving the American Historical Record Act (PAHR). CoSA used to be the Council of State Historical Records Coordinators. By 2005, they recognized there was no group to address the needs of state archivists and refocused themselves accordingly. Vicki Walch serves as the part time executive director and one other part time staff member. Thanks to their efforts CoSA is very organized and responsive (especially regarding emergency records responses, Hurricane Katrina, and local records issues) as well as very intent on advocating on behalf of the importance of records.

Kathleen Roe of the New York State ARchives, in particular, has been instrumental in CoSA’s proposed Preserving the American Historical Record Act. Records are often left out of budget proposals, so this Act would shore up inequalities between the well-funded national institutions—like the National Archives, the Library of Congress, and the Smithsonian Institution—and the rest of the country’s archives at the state and local level. The Preserving the American Historical Records Act is jointly supported by CoSA, the Society of American Archivists (SAA), and the National Association of Government Archives and Records Administrators (NAGARA) and has been introduced in the U.S. House (by Reps. Maurice Hinchey, D-NY, and Chris Cannon, R-UT) but its advocates are currently looking for co-sponsors. Pat encouraged motivated board members to approach their elected representative soliciting co-sponsorship. If fully funded, the Act would really help with records issues. Duncan expressed concern about the 50% match provision but found some solace in Pat’s reassurance that the provision probably included in-kind contributions as well as cash.

Other Business

Pat expressed her, and the board’s, appreciation to Sherry for her efforts compiling everyone’s reviews of the basic processing grant the Historical Society received from NHPRC. The grant is for a new archival processing model, entitled “More Product, Less Process.” Largely a backlog management mechanism, the “More Product, Less Process” method is intended to alleviate both processing time and the backlog of unprocessed holdings and should really make the state archives much more accessible to the public. Thanks to this grant, the Historical Society now has the funds for 2 full-time processing archivists for 20 months, with a third promised by KHS Executive Director, Jennie Chinn.

The meeting was adjourned.

.