2009 RM Self-Assessment Report Released!

Today’s post comes to us from Laurence Brewer, Director of the Life Cycle Management Division in the Modern Records Program.

Today we released our findings from the 2009 Records Management Self-Assessment.  Check it out here. In September 2009, we required all agencies to assess their own records management programs to determine how compliant they are with existing RM regulations and guidance.  With over 90% of all agencies responding, we were pleased with the response, but the findings show that there is still much work to do.  A quick look at the data shows that 79% of all responding agencies are at a moderate to high level of risk for their RM programs.  Our plan is to work with Congress, OMB, and Federal agencies to address many of the concerns in the report so that we can improve records management performance across the Government.

So which of the findings surprised you the most?  What actions do you suggest NARA pursue with agencies to improve Federal records management?

Stay tuned as we begin work on the 2010 Records Management Self-Assessment, beginning in May!

About Arian Ravanbakhsh

Records Management Policy Analyst in the Office of the Chief Records Officer.
This entry was posted in General and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to 2009 RM Self-Assessment Report Released!

  1. John Hoppe says:

    Laurence, a lot of the questions in the 2009 survey related to the development and dissemination of RM policies within agencies. Since the existence of a policy doesn’t necessarily equate to actual implementation of that policy, is it useful to assess risk to Federal records based on that criteria? An agency may have a rock-solid policy on managing e-mail as a record, but if workers are unable or unwilling follow it, the records are still at risk.

    In the 2010 survey, you might consider asking agencies to report on what percentage of their paper and electronic records are linked to NARA-approved disposition schedules. This would be a challenge for agencies to determine, but it would provide a more accurate assessment of risk.


Comments are closed.