1. The FEA Records Management Profile & the SDLC
Martha Morphy
Chief Information Officer
National Archives and Records Administration
GSA IT Summit
Washington D.C.
October 9, 2007
There are graphics behind the first nine slides that do not convey information. They show shadow images of the White House and National Archives.

2. Overview What is the RM Profile and why is it important?
Embedding the RM Profile into agency IT processes: EA, SDLC, CPIC, BPD

3. Background
Development of an RM Profile began as a response to a number of challenges Federal agencies face:
Agency records management procedures do not integrate people, policies, processes and technology well
Agency enterprise architectures (EA) do not systemically address records management requirements
Agency planning and execution of IT investments often overlooks the value of records management (RM)
Systems are often funded, designed and implemented without adequate thought about how those records will be managed over their entire lifecycle
More generally, we identified in the Profile a number of challenges that are clearly themes in the current business environment that can be addressed by the Profile
Processes supporting distributed RIM
Technological obsolescence
Overwhelming volume of ER
Difficulty assuring authenticity, reliability, and integrity
Ineffective implementation of RIM
#2 RM is not baked in to agency EA

4. The RM Profile is . . .
A cross-cutting framework in the five FEA Reference Models
Designed to help decision-makers define RM requirements and systemically and consistently embed RM practices into existing agency IT and business processes
A tool to help agencies address NARA, OMB, ISO, and legislative RM requirements that will enhance agency productivity and effectiveness
The Profile is both a high-level framework and a tool that provides practical guidance
It also provides resources for both RM and IT communities, as well as for program managers, GCs

5. RM Profile Objectives
Establish a common Government-wide framework for identifying records management requirements
Identify records management issues and requirements and link them to their implementing technologies and business processes.
Build records management requirements into agency IT governance processes for enterprise architecture
capital planning and investment control (CPIC)
business process design (BPD)
systems development life cycle (SDLC)

6. RM Checklist in the SDLC
4-6 key RM questions for each phase of the SDLC
There are several examples in the Profile itself on how a pilot might be done, but here is one example using an SDLC approach.
You can see how RM and the Records Officer is factored into each stage of the SDLC to ensure that records reqmts are addressed at each stage before records are created.
Stages include:
Concept Development, Requirements Definition, Preliminary Design, Development, Integration and Systems Test, Deployment and Acceptance, Production and Retirement and Rollover.

7. RM Checklist Questions in the SDLC
Concept Phase:
Is this system replacing a paper-based records system?
Are the paper records already scheduled?
Can the existing dispositions be used as the basis for new dispositions for this system?
Is this new system replacing an existing electronic system?
Is this existing system already scheduled?
Have you addressed the migration of the legacy data?
If the business process/workflow has or will be re-designed prior to system development, will the new business process account for all changes in the format, nature, and content of existing records?
Have you discussed these records management questions with your agency’s records management officer?

8. RM Checklist Questions in the SDLC
Requirements Definition Phase
Have you incorporated all records-related requirements into the system?
Have you identified additional records requirements based on your business needs?
Have you considered how the proposed records dispositions and retention times might impact the system’s records-related requirements?
For records of long-term value, is there a well-documented migration strategy to ensure the integrity and continued access to these records?
Have you incorporated all of the records-related requirements detailed in the system requirements document into the records requirements section of your draft IT Investment Proposal?
Have you validated the requirements and developed clear measures for each?
Have you discussed these records management questions with your agency’s records management officer?

9. Questions?
Contact Information
Martha Morphy
National Archives and Records Administration
(301)
NARA RM website:
RM Profile:
FEA PMO:

10. DoI’s FDMS Experience Sharon Whitt, Program Manager
Department of Interior
GSA IT Summit 10/09/07

11. eRulemaking and eDiscovery
Regulations.Gov Operational January Agency Functionality September September 125+ Federal Entities Deployed
Objective Provide the Public with easy access to Federal rulemaking Ability to comments electronically

12. eRulemaking and eDiscovery
Docket – Administrative Record for Rule
Advantages Search Capability Ability to deliver electronically Identification of Holds & Freezes
Disadvantages Business Function not System Coordination Records Officers, Business Staff, CIO’s Office, and Solicitors

13. eRulemaking and eDiscovery
DOI Preparation
Internal Set up Bureau Teams
Determine Scope List of Records Holds & Freezes Status of Bureaus Records Schedules Education for the Teams

14. eRulemaking and eDiscovery
DOI Preparation
External
DOI Participate in eRulemaking Workgroups Work with other Federal Agencies Coordination with NARA
Work with eRulemaking’s Contractor Understanding Rulemaking Workflow

15. eRulemaking and eDiscovery
Progress to Date DOI Senior Management Commitment Established DOI’s Internal Workgroups Participated in eRulemaking Requirements Set up Bureau, NARA, and DOI Teams Establish Implementation Schedule Work with Bureaus in Education, Acceptance
BLM and MMS implemented

16. eRulemaking and eDiscovery
Questions ?

17. GAO on Building the Electronic Records Management System (ERMS)
Explosion of Electronic Information – The Saga of Records Management
GSA IT Summit 10/9/2007
Jean Nazzaro, Director of Customer Relations - OCIO
15 minutes.
GAO is the Government Accountability Office.
GAO, as the Federal watch dog, performs audits, evaluations, & investigations for Congress.
4200 staff – matrixed organization.
2/3 staff in HQ in DC, 1/3 spread among 11 regions.
GAO produces about 1000 reports/testimonies a year.

18. Overview Background Business Requirements Stakeholders
Systems Development & End Users
Metrics
Lessons Learned
E-Repository in the Enterprise Architecture
Successful ERMS Implementation
Summary
GAO’s motivation for implementing RM:
Leverage institutional knowledge within and across functions
Provide a foundation for KM
Electronically manage and dispose of e-records produced by e-business processes

19. Background
Documentation is key to GAO’s work - -- about 1200 case files generated each year.
GAO pioneered implementation of document management in the Federal government.
Automated business processes need an electronic records management system (ERMS) to capture e-records.
Knowledge Services, Information Services & Technology Systems, and Quality and Continuous Improvement (Policy) formed a strategic partnership to build ERMS.
Hummingbird DM with RM 5.1
Subsequently purchased by Open Text (Oct. 2006)
Now referred to as Open Text’s e-DOCS DM/RM
GAO calls it DM/ERMS or just DM.
10 year history with DOCS
4 year history with Hummingbird
1 year history with Open Text.
GAO pioneered implementation of document management in the Federal government (to support nationwide collaboration; DM has 2 M docs in it)
(Began BPR 6 years ago & decided) Automated business processes needed an electronic records management system (ERMS) to capture e-records

20. Business Requirements
The ERMS had to:
Integrate with other e-business initiatives
Embed records retention into the electronic processes
Store documentation or pointers to documentation (paper, data sets, copyrighted material, artifacts, URLs, etc.)
Capture the record at creation or receipt
Minimize the end user’s responsibility for RM
Facilitate the RM staff making the RM decisions
Be easy to use
Integrate with other e-business initiatives (Travel Manager, disaster recovery copies of OPFs, etc.)
Minimize the end user’s responsibility for RM (i.e. PLACE NO BURDEN ON THE AUDIT STAFF)
Centralize management of multiple document repositories
Provide the foundation for knowledge management
Utilize the existing document management system

21. Stakeholders Analysts/Auditors/Attorneys DOCS Task Force
Work Paper Task Force
Automated Processes Task Force
KS, IT, & Policy Partnership
ERMS Steering Committee
ERMS Work Group
ERMS Task Forces (Processes/Metrics & Schedules)
Management
IT Investment Committee
Continuous Improvement Board
Primary Stakeholders are analysts, auditors, and attorneys.
Did our home work with nation-wide task forces – involved end users; all levels, HQ & Field Offices.
Many original task force members are still involved – now ERMS CoP
System Champions: C-LEVEL OFFICES: CG, GC, COO, CAO (model agency focus)
Partnership included CIO, CKO, RMO, ISTS PM, contract support staff and Vendor’s software engineer
Emphasize: First 6 bullets on slide – all end users.

22. End Users: Key to Systems Development
Analysts/Auditors/Attorneys contributed to the:
Prototyped System
Pilot System
Communication, Training, & Implementation Strategies
Phased Roll-Out
Community of Practice
Prototype in lab – RM & Vendor engineer
20 pilots – every major business function so everyone had a vested interest in the initiative
Implementation – team by team; office by office over 26 weeks
Contemporaneously with ERMS effort, we were a NARA pilot for Simplified Records & Information Disposition Schedules (RIDS).
These RIDS are the key to our ERMS System: 3 retention periods (buckets) which user chooses among by selecting a profile with which to save a document.

23. Simplified Retention and the 3-Bucket Approach
Summary of 3 Bucket Approach
Mission = Engagement Case Files
5 year retention unless historically significant
This/these are our primary functions
Testimonies
Audits
Organized by engagement number
About 1200 case files a year.
Note: This slide has a picture of a bucket on it.

24. Summary of 3 Bucket Approach, cont.
Policy & Special Collections Bucket captures records of permanent or long term retention
Organized by Function Title
Includes:
Policy
Organizational Structure
GAO’s History Program
Agency-level Policy Boards, Committees, Task Forces
Strategic Planning, Performance, & Accountability Reports
Note: This slide has a picture of a bucket on it.

25. Administrative – 7 year retention (statute of limitations)
Includes housekeeping & administrative program management functions that support GAO’s mission and routine operations – old GRS
Also includes:
Graphics and Printing
IG work
Mail & Couriers
Payroll & Benefits
Public Affairs
Records Management
Training
Vehicle Management.
Note: This slide has a picture of a bucket on it.

26. Metrics
Background: American Council for Technology/Industry Advisory Council (IAC): e-Government Shared Interest Group: White Paper on The Use of Metrics in Electronic Records Management (ERM) Systems, August 2004 at
Measurable Processes – No baseline available.
Perceptions – Pilot User Survey.
Internal customers are Auditors, Analysts, Accountants, Lawyers.
The want to see cost/benefit analysis and Return on Investment on projects.
Getting meaningful metrics very difficult.
Measurable processes – no baseline.
Current clean-up costs: $417K/yr.
4 yr. project of clean-up costs + records center storage costs are $2,080. ROI = 5 years.
Perception Survey – survey pilot participants
Does it make them more productive?
Does it interrupt them getting the job done?
Are new profiles easy to use?
How did ERMS impact their work processes?
Did they spend more or less time looking for documents with ERMS?
Result: ERMS had no impact on doing the work.

27. Lessons Learned
Engage policy (quality control/continuous improvement) staff early on in the ERMS design process to examine the difference between electronic and traditional documentation/evidence production
Assign reluctant users (as well as enthusiastic users) to the ERMS pilot groups
Train on the ERMS but also on basic Microsoft Applications software and Adobe.
User resistance to change – organizational culture heavily reliant on traditional paper processes (Used DM as a word processor)
Policy did NOT change – the medium did. Translating policies into e-processes – i.e. collaboration and e-supervisory review; drafts and versions.
13 Teams had 13 flavors of implementing audit policy & RM policy – see big differences in how work is performed when working with processes instead of just products.

28. E-Repository in the Enterprise Architecture
ERMS had minimal impact on the enterprise architecture because electronic records management is fully integrated with the document management (DM) system already in place
ERMS required no additional hardware
ERMS did require additional assistance from the DM system administrator and help desk staff
ERMS e-repositories store records throughout their:
creation process
active use
retention
value to knowledge management (reuse & reference).
Customized the system to give us 3 profiles –
1 per retention bucket.
The agency had multiple e-initiatives in process:
- e-workpapers
- e-case files
- e-indexing & e-referencing
- e-publication
- e-distribution of products (Congress & the public)
Multi-initiatives compounded cultural change.

29. Successful ERMS Implementation
System has management support from the chief-level offices
System use is mandated for GAO work
Simplified retention schedules make system use easy and almost transparent to the user.
Streamlined business processes incorporate electronic records management functionality
Policy refined to eliminate unnecessary tasks (e.g.. eliminated the need for forms by using the electronic profiles)
ERMS Community of Practice integral for voicing and working user issues.
GAO already had a culture of DM use.
Automated record capture at receipt or creation.
DM/ERMS provides the platform for end-to-end engagement/audit processes.
New systems being developed are being integrated in to ERMS – part of our architecture.
Stable platform – no serious system glitches.
650,000 records since 1/1/07. Old DM system had amassed over 2M documents over 15 years.
ERMS gives us centralized management of multiple records repositories of audit documentation records.

30. Summary: ERMS Works Criteria for success: The ERMS must be user-driven
E-business processes must be clearly defined
The ERM functions must be an inherent part of the business process
The ERM functions must be simple
The ERM functions must not place a burden on the users.
DM/ERMS is the foundation for GAO’s KM efforts (Vision)
Implemented 1/1/07 – Mandated use.
9/07 – about 650K docs in ERMS
– 27% of records captured
66% of users are capturing records.
Cost less than $3M – 16,500 labor hours among RM, IT, & supporting contractors. Initiative has taken 5 years.
GAO has well-defined lines of business so building ERM into our processes may have been easier than in most organizations.

31. Questions For more information, please contact: Carol Brock, CRM
Manager, Information Assets
Knowledge Services
U.S. Government Accountability Office
202/
Any questions?
Thanks for having us!