Electronic Document and Records Management System

More documents

Recommendations

Info

(d) Retention and Disposal(e) Access Control(f) Audit(g) Reporting(h) Usability(i) Design and Performance(j) Standards Compliance8.3 In addition, the specification includes optional requirements regardingAuthentication and Encryption, Document Management and the Management ofHybrid and Physical Folders.8.4 No such specification exists for local government and defining a specification foruse of ERMS within a Local Authority would be an unachievable task within theresource and time available within this project. The Lord Chancellor in his Code ofPractice further encourages Local Authorities to use this specification indeveloping their ERMS projects.8.5 The latest National Archives specification (TNA 2002) for ERMS will therefore betaken as the starting point for defining the requirements for any chosen system,although it is acknowledged that this has some associated risks. The NationalArchives also has an approval scheme for ERMS products assessed against theirfunctional requirements. It would similarly seem sensible to proceed with anapproved product.8.6 The Dorset Freedom of Information Working Group further commissionedconsultants to undertake a feasibility study of records management within all theAuthorities in Dorset. The study was funded by a grant from the ODPM. One ofthe outcomes of this project was to recommend software suppliers for ERMS. Thestudy identified a number of suppliers, however, this was a generic list and did notmake individual recommendations for each authority. It is worth highlighting,however, that the list of recommended suppliers was based on the NationalArchives approved list.8.7 At this stage, only one of the products approved against the TNA 2002specifications has been specifically tested whilst operating in collaboration withMicrosoft SharePoint Portal 2003. The National Archives website providesadditional information as to the assessment that was undertaken in evaluating theproduct:“Both the MS SharePoint and the Meridio 4.2 EDRM Accelerator interfaceswere examined throughout the test process of this integrated solution. All therequired functionality is available within the Meridio 4.2 EDRM Acceleratorinterface and some functionality is also available within the MS SharePointPortal Server 2003 interface primarily, but not exclusively, for end users. TheNational Archives approval of this product is based on users having access toboth interfaces as required.”8.8 On this basis, it is recommended that, should this business case for a full EDRMSsolution for the Council be supported, Meridio V4.2 EDRMS Accelerator beselected as the preferred solution at this stage. There is an optional workflowsolution to manage requests for information submitted under the Freedom ofInformation Act, however, the appropriateness of this solution will be assessed indetail when the project is underway.110
9. Cost9.1 A total of £65,000 was allocated for the implementation of document managementin June 2002. £34,000 has yet to be spent, £16,000 of which is ear-marked forscanning facilities.9.2 There will be costs associated with linking the EDRMS to back end systems, butthis cannot be established until post-implementation of the records managementsolution and following dialog with our back-end system suppliers. Priorities willneed to be identified against business requirement criteria.9.3 There are also costs associated with various options around scanning and thesolution chosen. A volumetric study is being undertaken to determine therequirements and options for internal/bureau scanning facilities, andcentralised/devolved scanning facilities.9.4 A scanning bureau could be used, for example, to scan documents larger that A3if insufficient quantities justified internal equipment and for appropriate backscanning.9.5 Purchasing scanners for each service area will be high, but will be more evenlyspread as the rollout would be done in a structured approach and so each time aservice area is introduced so a new scanner would be purchased. Since therollout period is expected to be relatively short so the benefits of this spread wouldbe diluted. There would be ongoing costs for the maintenance for each scanner,and then a replacement programme, as with the PC replacement programmecurrently being undertaken.9.6 Alternatively, a central scanning function, would have the highest initial set-upcosts, but would be the most efficient in the longer term as there would be little ifany costs associated with an increase in the service. As scanning would becentral, so larger scanners would be purchased, but there would be fewer of them.There would also be an initial cost to train appropriate staff.9.7 Regardless of the scanning solution chosen, a re-engineering of businessprocesses is required which will take some time. There would also be a largeamount of time involved in re-training staff, and dealing with the cultural changes.Investment Appraisal10. Do Nothing - MS SharePoint Portal 200310.1 The authority could continue to deliver information through its current channels,and not proceed with this project. This would, however, run a very real risk offailing to meet the FOI targets of delivering information requested by the citizen ina timely fashion and would not ensure compliance the Lord Chancellor’s Code ofPractice for the Management of Records, and thus render the Council liable,through non-provision of requested information.10.2 SharePoint is an extremely powerful tool. Its primary strength is that of a portal,designed to provide collaboration and productivity aids by enabling resources andinformation to be shared effectively and efficiently between multiple users, eitherin series or concurrently.10.3 However, SharePoint will not deliver all the functional requirements set by theNational Archives as set out in paragraph 8.2 above nor will it be compliant withISO 15489. As an example, a sophisticated EDRMS assigns security settings toeach Document and each Record it holds individually. This security enablesdifferent users to access the same folder and yet still have differing rights tomanage and manipulate the items held within this folder. Without this security any111
Page 2 and 3: Introduction1. Purpose Of Document1
Page 4 and 5: ISO15489 for records management by
Page 8 and 9: user able to delete from within the

Electronic Document and Records Management System

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?