PROJECT FILES IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE

This report briefly describes the work done in USAIDIDR from October 1992 through December 1993, by the Files Committee and Files Custodian Support Team to improve the project file system. This work was carried out within the context of the normal USAID/DR operations during 90 minute weekly meetings and limited work in addition to those meetings. No additional resources beyond a small local contract which provided some technical assistance on management improvement methodology and conducting effective meetings was used.

BACKGROUND

This effort to improve USAID/DR's project file system first began in October 1992 when the Deputy Director convened a series of meetings of representatives from 211 USAID/DR offices and professional levels to discuss improving USAID/DR operations using the Total Quality Management approach. From a prioritized list developed by this group of over 30 areas needing improvement, the three highest ranking topics were the clearance process, the files system and the voucher payment process. The files system was selected as the most straight forward area with which to deal. Out of the initial group a smaller group was formed to deal specifically with the task of improving USAID/DR7s files system. This group, the Files Committee (FC), was made up of approximately 10 individuals, including secretaries and professional permanent and contract staff, who volunteered to work on the files improvement effort.

The FC began meeting weekly. The first several meetings, under the direction of the Deputy Director, were dedicated to learning a methodology based upon the Total Quality Management approach to management improvement. This methodology employed the Plan-Do-Check-Act framework, taking a user orientation approach, and a philosophy of empowering employees to enable them to initiate and c a y out system improvements. The FC proceeded to apply this methodology to improve the USAID/DR files system. It met weekly, opting for a rotating organizational structure with each meeting's facilitator and recorder being performed on a rotating basis.

DESIGN FOR IMPROVEMENT

The FC first defined the problem, limiting their attention to improving the project file system. The FC then surveyed approximately one-half the USAID/DR staff to obtain the users view of the project files system's problems. In addition, baseline data was collected on the physical size of the project file system, including working files, and

the work required to maintain them. The inventory of project files totalled nearly 300 cubic feet (146 file cabinet drawers) plus an additional 96 binders. The copying time to maintain the system was estimated to be approximately 6.5 hours daily, which translated to roughly $50,000 per year. Next, the FC developed a purpose statement to guide its work and against which to measure the improvements made to the project files system. The purpose statement developed follows:

Purpose

To establislt an improved project filing system that is accessible, complete, easy-to-use and meets regulatory requirements while minimizing redundancy and cost.

With the purpose statement and the survey information to guide them, the FC developed a plan for improving the USAID/DR project files system. The plan was based upon the decentralization of official project files to the USAID/DR technical offices from the Communications and Records Section (C&R) where they had been maintained. It also involved using the LAN computer network to track new project documentation from initial receipt or creation through the filing step and to allow all LAN users access to electronic versions of USAID/DR-generated project documents. Moving official project files to the technical offices could yield significant savings by eliminating the technical offices' need to maintain files which duplicated the official project files held in C&R. However, providing all LAN users the ability to access and copy USAIDIDR-generated project documentation would be critical to obviate the need for staff offices to establish their own duplicate file systems.

In January 1993, after this planning phase, the FC gave several presentations describing the plan. (See Annex A) The first was to the Director, traditionally a strong advocate of centralized project files, for his approval of the plan which he readily gave. The second was to the Acting Assistant Administrator of the Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean, who was very impressed with the plan. The third presentation was at the monthly USAIDIDR General Staff meeting, where it was well received. And finally, the fourth presentation was made to the annual Executive Officers Conference held in the Washington, D.C. area.

PILOT TEST

The approach to implementation was set out in three phases. The first phase was the development of a file management program using Magellan software. Phase two was to conduct a pilot test in the Policy and Democratic Initiatives Office (PDI), where both the official physical project files and electronic project files were to be maintained, used and monitored. Finally, after successfully operating the new project files system in PDI, the system would be implemented throughout USAID/DR. PDI had been chosen for a number of reasons for the pilot test including: (a) that it was the newest and smallest USAID/DR technical office; (b) because all of the projects for which PDI had implementation responsibility were relatively new, with the entire PDI portfolio to be included in the test; and, (c) being located in the same building as C&R, filing guidance was easily available at any time and other offices could review the official project files in PDI as they had previously in C&R.

The file management software was developed and the pilot test initiated in April 1993. At the same time a regrouping of the FC took place. Files Custodians from each USAID/DR office were invited to become part of the effort to participate along with any of the original FC members who cared to continue. This regrouping required a period of transition for the FC, involved orienting the new members to the TQM methodology and to the design and implementation of the new project files system. At the initiation of the new members, the Files Committee was renamed as the Files Custodian Support Team (FCST).

The pilot test period was originally planned to last approximately 12 weeks, with an essential element being a disciplined and regularized monitoring system to assure integrity of the files system and help pinpoint problems. As its implementation proceeded, it was clear that the test would take longer. Several implementation issues arose, including delays in the installation of a document tracking system. The pilot test was not expanded throughout USAID/DR until September 1993. This longer than expected trial period came to be a valuable time for not only refining the system, but also consolidating the application of the methodology used to initiate this effort. During the pilot period the FCST received technical assistance from a local contractor on management improvement methodology and conducting effective meetings. Furthermore, a midterm users sum& was used to assess progress and make implementation adjustments.

It was also during this period that USAID/W's Office of Records Management (M/FA/AS/ISS/R&M) became more closely associated with this activity under an official joint project with the National Archives (NARA). The purpose of the joint NARA\USAID project was to begin to establish regulations on official files in electronic form for the entire Federal Government. Throughout this file improvement effort the

Office of Records Management provided valuable advice, guidance and support without which several problems could not have been as easily resolved. In August of 1993, representatives from these offices came to the Dominican Republic to see the new project files system firsthand and provide information on other such efforts in the U.S. Government. At the end of this visit, a NARA representative indicated that this system developed in USAIDIDR was the best design and implementation of this kind of effort that he had seen. In his follow-up report he concluded that, "..the system does a remarkable job of implementing the Functional Requirements Coverine the Information Life-Cvcle To Meet Records Management and Archival Needs - Draft April 1992." (See Annex B)

In September 1993, the pilot test in PDI was evaluated along with efforts that had proceeded in the General Development Office (GDO) and the Trade and Investment Office (TIO) in preparation for the implementation expansion. Among other things, the results of the evaluation showed that the inventory of project files had been reduced to a total of 240 cubic feet (120.5 file cabinet drawers) plus an additional 87 binders. Good progress had been made during the pilot, and in October this effort to improve USAIDIDR's project files system entered a new phase.

MISSION-WIDE IMPLEMENTATlON

In September 1993, USAID/DR had established a new Management Improvement Process. A means by which management improvements could be proposed, developed and implemented by USAID/DR staff under the authority of the USAID/DR Management Improvement Team (MIT), which is composed of all USAIDIDR USDH personnel. The effort to improve the project files system was formalized under the Management Improvement Process in the Project Files Improvement Initiative. An implementation schedule was developed, targeting the end of the year to have the new project files system in place throughout USAID/DR. (See Annex C)

With this renewed mandate of empowerment, the FCST proceeded to implement the improved project files system USAIDIDR-wide, continuing with the decentralization of official project files, transferring them from C&R to the offices responsible for project management, and including io the electronic files system, two new projects. As the work proceeded, whenever a dilemma was encountered, the FCST formed a sub-team to deal with it, applying, as previously, the problem solving methodology and focussing on user needs. Meanwhile in PDI, new projects and new official project documents were being added to the official project files held there and to the electronic files system.

In late October, C&R began the transfer of official project files. The initial worked proved more tedious than in the PDI test case. In PDI, being a relatively new technical office with all new projects, there had been fewer working files. In the GDO and the TIO, there were several projects that had been ongoing for many years. There was a substantial amount of work required to consolidate the official project files transferred from C&R with the voluminous working files that each office had been depending upon for years. By late November, the consolidation process had been completed. Virtually all the official project files had been transferred out of C&R and were being managed by technical office files custodians.

The next to last phase was to expand the electronic files system. The two new non-PDI projects were entered into the electronic files system. Furthermore, to make the system more complete, the GDO and T I 0 files custodians ardently pursued putting as many major documents as possible from older, ongoing projects onto the electronic files system. This work continues, which requires working with USAIDIDR's document scanner and meticulous proofing to assure that the electronic versions exactly match the official physical documents.

EVALUATION OF IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE

Finally, the FCST conducted a final evaluation of the new project files system, comparing the results of the survey and inventory work done in January 1993, with the current system. The results of the evaluation (See Annex D) show a much improved project files system. Some of the evaluation results from the 32 users surveyed were as follows. Forty-two percent indicated there were no problems with the new system, compared with only 12% a year ago. Only 19% thought that the files were incomplete, compared with 44% in January 1993. The time needed to locate an electronic file now is usually between 15 and 30 seconds, and it usually takes 5 minutes to find the official physical document. A year ago, the official project files were rarely used and substantial effort was used to maintain a parallel working files system.

In addition to the survey, the January 1993 physical inventory of project files and copying costs needed to maintain them was compared with the situation in January 1994. This research found that the number of project files had been reduced by SO%, project binders by 36% and copying by nearly 92%. In January 1993, it had been estimated that approximately 6.5 hours were spent daily making copies, at a cost of roughly $50,000 per year. In January 1994, about 30 minutes a day were spent making copies at a cost of approximately $2,700 per year. A reduction of $47,300 per year."

CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION

The use and maintenance of project files has undergone a significant change since this effort began. A measure of its success can be approximated in USAID/DR operating expense savings. In addition, there could be significant Agency savings if this system, or the lessons learned in establishing it, are of benefit to other missions or offices as the Agency moves toward reinventing the way it does business, including using electronic records to improve efficiency.

Another, and potentially much more valuable, indicator of success is how this effort was carried forward. It was done by employees who were heretofore indoctrinated by the USAID organizational culture to wait on management improvements dictated to them, rather than exercising self-initiative. With significant results, they enthusiastically embraced this opportunity of being empowered to improve a system for which they were responsible. It is for this reason, in addition to the need to maintain the gains made in the project files system, that it is strongly recommended that the Files Custodian Support Team be made a formal operating part of USAIDIDR through the issuing of a new Mission Order Manual (See draft in Annex E). If this is done, not only will the new project files system be carefully maintained, but USAIDIDR will be establishing the means by which this system can be continually improved.

File: U:\WRGARLAN\DOCS\FWPFII.RPT

1/ Most of this work to improve the project files system was done without extraordinary resources beyond - the normal work routine. There were less than 500 hours invested since September 1992, at a cost of well under $10,000.

ANNEX A

Project Filing System : A Proposal

@ The Approach Taken

@ Current Mission Practices

0 Ideas for Improvement

@ Implementation Plans

@ Wrap up

PURPOSE Toestablish an improved project filing system that is accessible, complete, easy- to-use and meets ( 3 regulatory requirements while minimizing redundancy and cost.

PROBLEMS WITH CURRENT FILE SYSTEM

No Problem

Comple 44%

PTOl .XLC

FILE SYSTEM EXPECTATIONS

Accessibility

Complete

Ease of Use

a File system meet regulatory requirements

n/a

FREQUENCY USE-OF C&R FILES

Never Rarely Yearly Quarterly Monthly Every Weekly Twice a Daily two week

Months

REASON FOR USING C&R FILES

Working Requested No Additional files by answers Info.

incomplete supervisor Needed

PTO5B.XLC Art: ADP Unit

INCLUDE DOCUMENTS IN LAN

Poslthre Neutral * Negative

US AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESULT OF STUDY ON FILES

OFFICIAL FILES , .

32 I 0 I 30 MINUTES DAILY I Agreements/PP/PIOT I

OD MGT

CON PDO PDI

GDO

DUPLICATE FILES

TRG N/A N/A N/A N/A PVO PRJ 3 0 30 MINUTES DAILY Contracts

N/A N/A N/A N/A - - 15 MINUTES DAILY Amendments

20 20

0.75 34.5 36

0 64 7 20 5

6 MINUTES DAILY 10 MINUTES DAILY 30 MINUTES DAILY 60 MINUTESDAILY 180 MINUTES DAILY

Copies w/clearance PlLs/PIOTs

AgreementsIPP Various

. Cables

m m J ~ m m u o = ~ m m

AGENCY FOR INTERNATION DEVELOPMENT CURRENT FILE OPERATIONAL COST

361 Mins daily x 30 copies per minutes = 10,830 copies

10,830 copies x 0.20 cents per copy = RDS2,166.00 per day (USS173.28)

Q Approx. man-hour cost (based on FSN 516 wage) = RDS30.94 per hour x 6.02 hours daily = RDS 186.26 per day (USS14.91)

RD$2,352.26 per day = US$788.79

This year

represents an average cost per of US$50,000

New Design for Project Files

OFFICIAL PHYSICAL FILES

ELECTRONIC FILES

@ MONITORINGIMEASUREMENT

e RETIRE FILES

(To establish. an improved project filing

I system tha t is accessible, complete, easy to- I use and meets regulatory requirements while I '

hinimizing redundancy and costs.

I PROPOSED CHANGES

[3ased upon results of the studies and survey

I w e have designed a new system tha t I :

r satisfies all of the different aspects of the

physical

[stated purpose by introducing two very [simple basic changcs:

- Transfer official I - implemen~ing 'offices.

- Create dectronic project fi les.

I

b . Accessibility

IMPROVED FEATURES OF NEW SYSTEM

- Project documents. p ~ c e d in The Mission will be readily accessible to

everybody on the LAN. (Certain Documents such as PIO/Ts will be

controlled)

- - Dis~ribution will be irnmeciiate.

- Signed document originals and supporting outside ciocurnen~s wilr at;

available in the implementing offices where files are most utilized.

I 2. Completeness

- Existing HB21 regulations wil l be fol lowed for the official file.

- Documents not electronically filed wil l be listed on a monthly delinquent

report to be circulated ;o all offices.

- Documents originating outside The Mission requiring action wil l be filed

in the official physical file and at some future date entered into t h e

computer by a scanner and filed electronically. An index of these

documents wil l be available in the LAN.

14. Ease of Use ' - The electronic files will have the same menu as the physical official

/ files, but wi th the added convenience of desktop accessibility.

I 7 . Meets A.I.D. RegulationslSafeguarding

1 [ - Official files will adhere t o HB21 filing regulations.

A file custodian and alternate wil l b e assigned in each office with

official files and follow file check-out procedures similar to the one

being used in C + R.

Official files shall not leave the office and the cabinet will be locked

after office hours.

. 1. Reduce Redundancy

! ' 1 - AS personnel gain confidence in the computerized system the number

of duplicate files will be reduced.

1 . Reduce Cost

The costs associated wi th photocopies (paper, toner, labor) will be

substantially reduced.

Current System = US S50,000/year

New System = USS5,OOOlyear (Cost of maintaining official files + addition rC disk space)

( 3 . Ease of Use m

- The electronic files will have the same menu as the physical ofFicii11

I I files, but with the added convenience of desktop accessibiiiry.

I f . Meets A.I.D. RegulatiansISafeguarding

Official files wil l adhere t o HB21 filing regulations.

A file custodian and alternate wil l be assigned in each office with

official files and follow file check-out procedures similar to the one

being used in C + R.

Official files shall not leave the office and the cabinet will be locked

after office hours.

Reduce Redundancy

- As personnel gain confidence in the computerized system the number

of duplicate files wil l be reduced.

Reduce Cost

The costs associated wi th photocopies (paper, toner, labor) will be

substantially reduced.

Current System = US S50,OOOlyear

New System = USS5,OOOlyear (Cost of maintaining official files + addition C disk space)

I I BEST AVAILABLE COPY

I I

Official Files Copies available upon request - 1-1021 Rets

- Implcme~~~ing Off im

- Coslodian ' - Conlrol

{ Distribution I 1 - C+R monitor fllc action (delinquency report)

. -Special file Directory - Index of Incoming Doc.

DOCIRACK File Project Direclory Rc~ire lo Action available to all Campulcr 13pcs

I Elcetronic file

- *OUTSIDE

DOCUMENTS -Sanncr

TECH OFFICE RESPONSE

US AGENCY FOR INTERNATIO~~XL DEVELOPMENT

ANNEX B

6 December 1 993

Rick Garland Dominican Republic USAID/Santo Domingo Unit #5541 APO, AA 34041

Dear Rick,

Washington, DC 20408

Greetings! I hope everything is going well in Santo Doming~. Please pass al greetings to everyone at the Mission.

cC-

I am enclosing a copy of my report on the visit Renee, Marilyn, Scott, and I made to the Santo Domingo Mission. This report was drafted in September. Unfortunately, the report did not receive final approval until very recently.

As I hope you will be able to tell from my report, I was very impressed with the EFS and Doctrack. I believe that, with a few minor changes, the systems and procedures that have been put into place at USAlDlSanto Domingo can rneet0the Functional Reauirements Coverina the Information Life-Cvcle To Meet Records Manaaement and Archival Needs - Draft A ~ r i l 1992. 1 firmly believe that the key to the success of this project is the enthusiasm and dedication of the Files Custodian Support Team. You should all be very proud of your work.

I want to thank you and everyone at the Mission who made our visit so successful and so pleasant. Thank you very much. If you have any questions about this report, please don't hesitate to call me on (202) 501-5565.

Sincerely,

MARK CONRAD Archivist Center for Electronic Records

Nananoml Archives and &o?& Mminisrmnmnon

Report on the Electronic Filing System (EFS) and the Document Tracking System (Doctrack) 9 September 1993

On 30 August 1993, Renee' Poehls of the United States Agency for International Development (AID), Scott Sherman of LTS (an AID contractor), Marilyn Redrnan of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), Office of Records Administration, Agency Services Division (NIA), and I traveled to the AID Mission to the Dominican Republic in Santo Domingo (AIDIDR). We were in the Dominican Republic for four days. Most of the first and last day.:were used for travelling to and from the Dominican Republic.

The purpose of the trip was to examine two prototype electronic systems that have been implemented in the AID Mission in the Dominican Republic. The two systems are the Electronic Filing System (EFS) and the Document Tracking System (Doctrack). The EFS prototype was to be evaluated on the basis of the Functisnal Reauirements Coverina the Information Life-Cvcle To Meet Records Mana~ement and Archival Needs -Draft Aoril 1992 to ensure the electronic system could meet agency, records manageinent, and archival needs. These requirements were developed by NARA's information Technology Standards Working Group. A copy of these requirements had been furnished to AIDiDR when they were designing the EFS. (See Appendix A,)

EFS is designed t o maintain an electronic copy of most of the "final" documents that are filed in the hard copy project case files. The majority of the documents in the hard copy project case files are currently scheduled as permanent records of AID. These documents will be transferred to NARA. AID would like to explore the idea of making the electronic version of the project files the permanent records and making the hard copy project files disposable.

The Doctrack is designed to track documents in hard copy as they are routed through different offices within AIDtDR. Once a document reaches "final" form it is filed in hard copy and electronically. The Doctrack records this fact as well. The Doctrack is used to verify that "final" hard copy documents are replicated in EFS. It should be noted that certain documents are purposely left out of the EFS. Classified material is not filed electronically. If a hard copy document is not available in electronic form and cannot easily be scanned, it is not included. E-mail is usually not included in the EFS.

AIDIDR is currently developing a Project File System. The Project File System consists of two primary initiatives: (1) a program to load an electronic version of AID project document files into the EFS, and (2) a program to decentralize the hard

National Archiues and Records Admirr#tmtion

copy files. I t is hoped that the two initiatives will be complementary. By filing the documents electronically and making them available throughout the mission via a LAN, AIDIDR hopes to reduce the physical handling and copying of documents in the hard copy files. By havin'g the hard copy files available in the offices where they are most frequently used rather than in a central file, AID/DR hopes to cut down on the time it takes to access the hard copy files and reduce the number of "working copies" of documents in individual offices:.

Analysis of the EFS vis a vis the.Draft Functional Requirements

I. CREATION, IDENTIFICATION, AND RETENTION OF RECORDS

The EFS is used for the storage of a discrete set of documents related to the primary mission of AID. The EFS stores an electronic'bersion of most of the.. documents found in a project document file. Documents that are created and modified in electronic form using word processing, database, or spreadsheet software are filed in the EFS when the documents are in their "final" form. Documents that come in from outside the agency, or that are not readily available in electronic form, are scanned using optical character recognition software and filed. With a few exceptions for documents that cannot easily be scanned, or classified or e-mail documents, the system captures all the documents that are kept in the manual system. .

For the most part the EFS meets the requirements for creation, identification, and retention of records. Most documents retained in the manual system are retained in the EFS. There are clear criteria for generating and retaining 'records in the

- . . system.

II. RETRlEVABlLlTY OF AND ACCESS TO RECORDS

EFS uses Lotus' Magellan software to view all the electronically filed documents. Magellan allows a user to view documents stored in their native file format (e.9. Wordperfect, dBase, Lotus 1-2-3, etc.). Magellan also allows a user to launch the application a particular file was created in to manipulate the file without leaving the Magellan environment. Documents are stored as individual files. File names conform to DOS naming conventions.

At the present time, AIDIDR has not implemented any file naming conventions in the EFS system. Rather, documents are filed in DOS subdirectories that parallel the manual filing system. That is, documents are filed by office, then by project number, then by general type of document, then by specific type of document. Each level of sorting is represented by a subdirectory on the network server. Knowing where you would locate a hard copy document in the manual system is the key to locating the electronic version of the document within the EFS.

Magellan also provides the user with the capability to search for a particular string within the text of all documents in a particular directory. This is accomplished by creating an index to all the words, in all the documents in the.directory. The system creates a large index file on each user's hard drive. Building these indexes can take a great deal of time. The index software does not use stop words. If a researcher enters a word that shows up in many files, the search software takes a great deal of time compiling a list of files and rankirig them for relevance to the search terms. This utility does not appear to be used often at AIDtDR.

All users of the system have the capability to read, copy, or print all documents in the EFS. Only the File Custodian for a particular office or the System Manager has the ability to modify a document, file a document in a particular subdirectory, or remove a document from the EFS; These privileges are granted at the subdirectory level. . 4% .. While all the files on the system are stored in a software-dependent format, it should be possible to export most of these files to a format that meets NARA transfer standards. AIDtDR does not presently have the hardware necessary to store the files on media that meet NARA transfer standards. However, they should be able to transmit those files electronically to either AID/Washington or directly to NARA.

If these files were to be transferred to NARA, it would be very important to capture all of the information about the directory structure - and,each file's location within that structure - in order t o place a particular document in it's proper context. I will address the question of systems documentation in V. DOCUMENTATION, below.

EFS does provide the capability to preserve the text of original documents. Given the suite of software presently used by AID/DR, it should be possible to transfer the data to NARA with very little technical difficulty. It would be possible to access the transferred data without resorting to the software used to create or manipulate the data. A researcher would have to understand the directory structure and the context that the structure provides for the files. Access to documents in the system is control1e.d at the subdirectory level.

Ill. RELIABILITY AND' VERIFICATION OF DATA.

Documents are not stored in the EFS until they are in their final or official form. As mentioned above, every user has read, copy, print access to all documents in the EFS. Only the File Custodian for a particular office or the System Manager has the ability to modify a document, file a document in a particular subdirectory, or remove a document from the EFS. The Files Custodian checks the electronic version of a document word-for-word against the hard copy original to verify it is a true copy prior to filing the electronic document in the EFS.

On a regular basis, the Files Custodian and the Communications and Records Officer use the Doctrack to select a sample of records in the EFS. The sample records are retrieved from both the hard copy files and the EFS and reviewed for completeness and accuracy.

The system does not document who had access to what data when. This information is not considered important to AIDfDR programmatic functions.

IV. RETENTION AND DISPOSITION. .

The EFS is still under development. To date, records created and maintained by this system have not been scheduled. The system parallels the manual filing system in such a way that it should be easy to identify, access, and segregate documents for disposition actions on the basis of the disposition instructions in the approved schedule for the hard copy project document files. While the same dispositi& may not be applied t o the electronic files, the system has the capability to retrieve and manipulate the electronic equivalent of the paper records series.

As mentioned above, the system should be able to produce files that meet NARA transfer requirements. This capability should ensure that AIDfDR will have the ability to migrate the EFS to other systems or media. Retrievability of the documents in another system will depend on whether or not the context provided by the present directory structure can be transferred or translated into the new system.

Only the Files Custodian or the System Manager has the ability to delete a document from the EFS. To date, procedures have not been codified for removal of documents from the EFS.. The initial loading of all project files from all offices has not been completed.

The system procedures for proper maintenance, handling and inspection of storage media have not been written. However, procedures for the regular backup of all EFS files are in place and operational.

The EFS enables a novice user to access all the documents in the system. A records manager or a'rchivist should have no problem examining this system for scheduling or appraisal purposes.

V. DOCUMENTATION.

The EFS is still being developed and modified. The initial data load is incomplete. To date, very little documentation has been written. AIDjDR is currently developing training materials for the EFS. The training materials will provide basic documentation for the EFS, but additional documentation will need to be written.

Additional Comments on the AIDJDR Project Filing System

1. The EFS system is used for filing documents once they reach their "final", "official" form. From a records management perspective it would make sense to control all documents created in AIDIDR with one system. The file structure.. employed for the final version of documents could easily be extended to accommodate "working drafts" of documents, and other documents that are currently filed in directories outside the EFS. This would enable AIDIDR to establish disposition and retention instructions for all documents on the AIDiDR LAN on the basis of the location of the documents within in the directory structure or some other identifier.

2. 1 believe that AIDIDR should seriously consider implementing naming conventions for all documents. Naming conventions could help prevent documents from being filed in the wrong subdirectory. Such conventions could also provide another way to access documents other than through the directory structure context. Naming conventions could facilitate moving the documents to another system that might not easily accommodate the directory structure used by EFS. .

AIDIDR has developed recommendations for file naming conventions. (See Appendix B.) The mission has also developed a system for naming versions of a document as it moves from first draft to final document. I believe these naming conventions need t o be refined and implemented mission wide.

The recommended general naming conventions use the standard DOS format of an eight-character file name followed by a three-character extension. The first letter of the file name is a code for the originating office. Characters two through eight are user selected. The three letter extension is used for a code for the document type.

The recommended convention for controlling versions of a document is to have ail versions of a file share the same name. As a new version of a document is created, the previous version of a document has a number added to its file name. The "current" version of a document is the only version of the file that does not have a number in the file name. This system seems to have a great potential to produce multiple working copies of a document with the same name as a document is moved from one user to another. As a new user acquires a document and

makes changes to the document, they add a number to the version of the document they received. Without knowledge of how many previous iterations the document has been through, the new user may assign a number to the version they received that has already been used for an earlier iteration. his system should be revised to prevent the possibility of multiple versions of a document having the same name.

Implementing naming conventions throughout the mission would help prevent having multiple versions of a document with the same name on the LAN. Naming conventions would also help provide a clue as to the contents and context of a particular document if it were located somewhere other than in its appropriate subdirectory on the LAN.

3. AIDfDR needs to move quickly to establish files management procedures for all files on the LAN. The System Manager recently had to do a cleanup of the public directories on the LAN. The only way that files could be systematically removed from the LAN was by the date files were last modified. The System Manager sent a notice to users of the system warning that all files in the public directories that had not been modified in the past six months would be deleted. AIDfDR personnel did not view this as a serious problem. We were told that the storage capacity of the system was being increased and there should be plenty of disk space available to accommodate files.

Adding more disk space is not a good records management or information resources management solution to controlling working files on a computer system. Extending the EFS filing protocols to all documents on the LAN seems like a much more practical solution. AIDtDR could assign disposition instructions to all documents at the subdirectory level. The System Manager or Communications and Records Supervisor could then carry out those instructions on a routine basis. This would ensure documents would be retained on line for as long as they were needed. The documents could be moved off line or deleted when they were no longer needed for current business.

4. One of the critical elements to the success of the Project Filing System is the personnel involved with the project. h he Files Custodian Support Team meets on a weekly basis to discuss progress in implementing the Project Filing System. Members raise problems they encounter and the group attempts to devise solutions to the problems. All members take an active role in the work of the group. Without this group's enthusiasm and active participation, the Project Filing System would be very difficult to implement. The Files Custodian Support Team seems to have "pride of ownership" of this system.

Conclusion

The EFS was developed and implemented as a prototype system in a very short time. Despite this fact, the system does a remarkable job of implementing the Functional Reauirements Coverina the Information Life-Cvcle To Meet Records Manaaement and Archival Needs - Draft Aoril 1992. None of the problems cited in this report are insurmountable. Most of them would require minor changes to the application or office procedures. Given the enthusiasm of the Files Custodian

.

Support Team, it is very likely that the final form of the EFS will meet all of the draft functional re uirements. 9

- . MARK CONRAD Archivist Center for Electronic Records

APPENDIX A.

Functional Reauirements Coveri'np the Information Life-Cvcle To Meet Records Mana~ement and Archival Needs - Draft A ~ r i l 1992.

OFRECORDSADY *++NAT'LARCHIYES Q O O E

FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS COVERING THE INFORMATION LIFE-CYCLE

TO MEET RECORDS MANAGEMENT AND ARCHIVAL NEEDS

INTRODUCTION

This paper describes generically those essential capabilities required.of any automated information system (i.e., the

. functional requirements) in order to satisfy, statutory and regulatory requirements for the creation, management,::and disposition of records' of Federal agencies. This paper -. . repzsents a consensus statement from -NARAfs 1nfoFKat-ion a - . Technology Standards Working Group. . I

. .

I. CREATION, IDENTIFICATION, AND RETENTION OF RECORDS. Provide the capability to identify and ca~ture all records [see footnote 1 and Addendum] and store and retain them for subsequent retrieval in order to ensure adequate and proper documentation of the activities supported by the system.

'unless otherwise noted, the term '!recordn means the definition given by 44 USC 3301: ..

". . . all books, papers, maps, photographs, machine readable materials, or other documentary materials,' - regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by an agency of the United Stateg Government under Federal law or in connection with the transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate:for preservation by that agency or its legitimate successor as evidence of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of the Government or because of the informztional value of data in them. . . . $1

It is this definition which.underlies NARArs mission to "guide znd assist Federal agencies to ensure.adequate and proper documentation of the policies and transactions of the Federal Government and to 'ensure proper records dispositiontt ( 4 4 USC 29041 , including identifying, preserving, and providing public access to those records of permanent value.

01/22/93 11:34 B 2 0 2 5 0 1 7452 OF RECORDS AD&i +-t+ NAT'L ARCHIYES @ O O ;

i .

The system design must explain not only how to capture and process information, but also when and how,to generate and retain records.

a. If the agency required certain records to be kept in a manual system, the automated application which replaces it should be designed to generate and retain records which satisfy the same requirements for creating and keeping records.

b. If an automated application substantially changes the way an agency operates, or if it involves new activities that were not performed under a manual system, then the agency should determine its need for generating and keeping records and ensure that the automated application meets .that need. .

-- . . .- 11. RETRIEVABILITY OF AND ACCESS TO RECORDS. .Ensure the . - - a

retrievabilitv of all electronic records for their entire authorized life, including, when applicable, their transfer to and preservation in the National Archives.

a. The system design should meet needs for preserving either the informational content or the original human readable representation of text documents, or both.

b. When text documents are stored in an automated filing system, they should be retrievable without,recourse to proprietary formats.

c. The system should permit (and control) varying levels of access to all or part of the data.

d. The system must be able to output all electronic records scheduled for perrdanent preservation in the National Archives-in a way that permits their transfer in accordance with NARA regulations. Electronic records transferred to the National Archives must be accompanied by the necessary documentation.

111. RELIABILITY AND VERIFICATION OF DATA. Ensure thf reliability and inteuritv of data in the system.

a. The system should provide, as needed, on-screen verification that a document is the final version end/or has been officially signed, or endorsed, by someone. It should Iffreeze" final, or official, versions of documents.

b. The system should provide information on authorizations for data access, i-e., information on who had access to whzt data when, if relevant to the agency programmatic function.

IV. RETENTION AND DISPOSITION. Ensure the proper retention and

I disposition of all records and related documentation according to the instructions in an approved records schedule (SF 115 or General Records schedule) .

a. The system should be able to identify, access, and I , segregate the text documents or data files corresponding to an approved item in a records schedule and perform, or pernit appropriate users to perform, the authorized disposition instructions.

I b. System upgrades should 'be anticipated in the initial design. Any upgrade or replacement should be effected to ensure that records access and retention requirements are met; especially that necessary records which predate the upgrade continue to'be retrievable.

. .: .. . . c. . The system should provide for migrating data :to different

storage media in a way that ensures compliance with authorized ( disposition. instructions. 1

I d. The system should prevent deletion of a document or data file without verification by an authorized official.

e. System procedures should include proper maintenance, handling and inspection of storage media, and the system should prompt appropriate personnel to execute such procedures (e .g . , rewinding tapes). ..

f. The system should enable a records manager or an archivist to browse its contents for records scheduling and appraisal purposes.

V. DOCWENTATION.' Create and maintain both Droaram and technical documentation, which'is essential foy proper creation, use, maintenance, and disposition of electronic records. Technical documentatio-n shoyzd follow the Standards for .- "~ocumentat-ion for System ~i%e-cycle Phases, in Appendix C of the I4Model:Framework for Management Control . . Over Automated Information . Systems4'*. In addition:

a. Documentation should identify when and how data become records. In t e x t document systems, for example, a document may become a record whenever it is'transmitted to someone else in the organization or whenever it is ltfiled.m

b. For every segregable category of records in the system 1 (as determined by the scheduling process), documentation should specify: (1) the manner and procedures for transfer to a storage medium, (2) the duration of storage in that medium and every anticipated succeeding medium, and (3) the manner and procedures

OF RECORqS ADI ++-t NAT'L ARCHIVES a010

. . ' 4 -- - .-

I - 01/22/93 11:38 e 2 0 2 5 0 1 7452 ' OF RECORDS ADY +++ NAT'L ARCXIYES @ l 0 0 9 / ~

for carrying out the authorized disposition of each category of -

records.

c. The system documentation should identify links between electronic records and related paper records. .

d. The documentation should be updated to reflect major changes in the system, and the system should maintain all generations of documentation for the authorized life of the system.

*Available from OMB.

APPENDIX B.

Summary File Naming Convention Recommendations

. .

D I m m DOCUMENT TYPE EXTFiNSIONS

Action Plan Action Memorandum to the Director Action Memorandum to the Ambassador Aide Memoire Annual Budget Submission Audit Report Audit Budget Cable CDSS Close-Out Report Congrwioarl Notification Coagrersioarl Presentation Colrtrrcl Cooperative Agreement EERs Environmcatd Assessment Evrlurtion Fur Field Trip Report FSN Perfamrace Evaluation Report Grant Agreement Grant lmpkmentrtiw Letter lndefdte Quratity Contract Initial Envlronmeatrl Examination l n t d Coatd Assessment Inventory Invitation Invitation for Application Least Mtcr l a t e r of Commitment Letter of Credit Memo to the Ambo Memorandum Mission Notice NIV Referral Operational Year Budget PACR PIO/P PIO/T PIO/C

AP AMD AMA AIM A B S AR

AUD .BUD .CBL CDS .COR .CN .CP .C

.CA .EER .EA

.EVL

.FAX .FTR .PER .G A .GIL SQC .IEE .ICA .INT .INV .IAP J;EA .LFZ .LC

.Lot AMB MEM .mc .NIV .om .PCR .PIP .PIT .PIC

I D . DOCUMENT TYPE EXTENSIONS

Pre-Award Survey Press Release Project Id. Doc. Project Implementation Letter Project Paper Report of Long-Distance Calls Request for Proposal SARs Scope of Work Speech Voucher Work Request

ORIGINATING OFFICE/'TEAM CODE (la Character) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A ADP C CON D OD I PDI G GDO M MGT N TRG P PDO R RCO T TI0 U CU

1. Fist character of the filename should be the Office Code

2. Characters 2-8 of the filename are user-selected (is. projed number or any ID to let user know what the document is about)

3. The extension should be as per document type

ANNEX C

I 2

USAID/DOMINICAN REPUBLIC Mission Management Improvement Process DETAILED IMPLEMENTAVON PLAN (DIP)

P a p 1 of 2

The purposo of the mission management improvement procow is to change the way the miaaion works (o increase: 1. The development impact of our efforts 2. Usor aatlsfaction with our products 3. Staff development

I 1

ntle: Project Files Improvement Initiative I Date: October 4, 1993 i 1. lm~rovement Goal: I

m a t changes are expected aa a result of the initiative? (Refer to sections 1 and 2 of the Management Improvement IniUatlve (MII) proposal In terms of I the mlsction cflteria.) I

I 1- A vision: To establish an improved project filing system that is accessible, complete, se and meets regulatory requirements while minimizing redundancy and cost. I

Users 'an expect ro ect files to have: (1) significantly im roved access, due to proximity easy-t0- t of official physica ! f 1 les to users (decentralization) and desk) top?access to LAN users of t

enerated files (elec. files); (2) enhanced and completeness from substantial I on in duplicate files and improved content; (3) uncomplicated and

secure check-out system for official files, rogram for electronic files; and, I I (4) reduced copying costs (time & equip.) icate files, electronic user reference capability, and automated copying (i.e. printing) of electronic files. f

How do these changes directly contribute to longer-term miaaion program and management strategies? I

- - I Increased accessibility (internal 6 external) to project files More complete project files (improved monitoring) I 1 :: Quicker and more consistent project implementation decisions

I

- - Reduced cost of maintaining project files (less staff time 6 fewer copies) I

I - - Method established to assure maintenance and continual improvement in the project

files system I

1

Team Members: I Who are team members and what is their role? (See sections 3 and 6 of the MI1 proposal)

1 Y. $arrasco, J. Santelises, G. payin - - files cust. & tech. off. coordinators 'I ) (u A.~enavides, C. Castro - - g

* uidance on reg. and monitoring subport

3 R. Medina, E. Silvestre, M. Estrada, M. Diaz (or N. Lopez) - - t files cust.

( 4 Rick Garland - - Team Leader I

(5)

1

3. Scorn: What is the ~~~as, problem, or opportunity to study?

( To eviluate the official project file system, desi n a system that will better satisfy user needs, and take advantage of the technology now In place, or easily obtainable, in order to improve the project files systkm.

I . .

What are the boundaries or Ilmitations; induding limiia on period of perfomunca and rewurocn? . . This initiative will only deal with ro ect files. There will befa pilot test of the

mproved system. The implementation o ! t i is effort should be completed by December 31, 1993, 1 1 t h the institutionalization of a method for maintenance and continual improvement of the

f roject files system, Some OE funds needed to finance: (1) 2 day TDY for Head of A.I.D./W ffice of Records and Management; (2) Doctrack development and sup (3) a scanner; (4) ile cabinet locks, security bars, and limited materials for ensur file

ntegri ; and, (5) local contract to prepare file system to the

, Rick Mangrich and Francis Conway. Team Hem ers, support will occasionally be needed from other files custodians, HGT/ADP, Joe

Barley

I I .

I , Mission Management Improvement Process i . . ' Detailed Implementation Pkn (DIP)

Pa902012

dicrtora of Success: How will benefm be recognized and what Is the target magnltude of Improvement expected?

P enefits to be recognized by: reduction in copying costs; improved access to project files project file users; reduced time to locate needed project documents; more complete roject files; easier use'of existing documentation; reduction in time spent filing project cuments; reduction in time tonproduce copies of project documentation; and improved nitoring of official project files.

, ,

at approach/method will be used to prwide Indicators of success, e.g., Interviews, work samples, surveys?

Y <

All of these approaches/methods will be used to provide indicators of success, e.g. work 'interviews and surveys.

{ .

1 , : Date: I I.

stoner; r.g., outmme dates:

Baseline Analyslr

lmprovemint knpkmentation

I Analysis of Indicators

lm~rwemont Redefinition

ogre= Report Dates:

Fill In Month OctiNov I Dec I

Ruourcos: k b. Equipment Estimated

lam Member tiours x Frequency x Duration = Total Scanners; Doctrack; File cabinet locks and bars; Special file folders.

7 Fik CuModianr 14h wk. 13wk. 182hr

2 C&R Rsp. 2h Y a 26ht

1 ~ t . nle hat. l h Il I a 13hr c. Information

Rch W a n d 2.5 . I# 32.5hr Support from A. I. D. /W Off ice of Records & Management; local contract for documentation

3 Mditnl Suppl M

I

nrources (People, equipment, informath) and nwlrn Is8u.r')

F The team for this files improvement initiative need to be empowered to: (a) meet re ularl R f 1 d as needed u to the number of hours indicated in this plan; (b) call upon the Add tiona pport up to t e indicated amount of hours without obtaining further approval; (c) conduct

urveys throughout USAID/DR without obtaining further permission. (d) provide input to the rther development of DTS and to ADO procurement; and. (e) rhodd have the authoeity to e recommendations on improvements to the official project files systen directly to the

ANNEX D

PROJECT FILES IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE

1. INTRODUCCION 11. .HISTORIA . ,

111. COMPARACION DE DATOS Y STATUS ACTUAL:

- Emuestas - Sistema en Cifras - Description delsistema

Actual

IV. FUTURO V. PREGUNTAS

ME JORAMIENTO DE ARCHIVOS DE PROYECTOS

HISTORIA

t USAIWDR Management Improvement - Septiembre 1992: Creacion del MOM Committee

t Octubre de 1992: Sub-Comite de Archivos Proyectos - Encuesta: Archivos, Clearance y Proceso de Pago

t Metodologia: Total Quality Management (TQM) : Plan-Do-Check-Act

t Encuesta a1 Usuario e Inventario de Archivos

t Presentacion a1 la Mision--Enero de 1993 - Otras Presentaciones

t Plan Piloto en PDI -- Znicio

t Creacion del "Files Custodians Support Team If

t Septiembre de 1993: Presentacion a1 MIT (Management Improvement Team)

Problemus del Sistema Anterior

N i n g u n o 12%

Distr . Lar 6%

N/A M a 1 A r c h l v a d o 26%

9% Poco Accesl ble

Problemas con el Nuevo Sistema

I ncompleto 19%

Ninguno 42%

M a1 Arch i vado i Poco Accesl bl e

8%

Nuevo Sistema Nln uno

4%

12% v Mal Archlvado

Poco Aozarlble 8%

Sistema Anterior

N/ A

Ma1 Archlvado !?A%

Cumplimiento de Expectativas

Ot ros 6%

Curnple R e g u lacfones 21 %

Facl 1 U so 29%

Cornpleto 19%

Acces i bl e 25%

Uso del Nuevo Sistema

f

I I I

No Indiferente Si

Tiempo p/ Localizar Documentos

I --- I I I I I I

1-15 s. 16-30 s. 91-60 s. Hasta 2 m. 2-5 m. 6-15 m. 16-60. m.

Arch. Electronico Arch. Fisico

Frecuencia Uso Archivos Oficiales

Nunca Raro Dlarlo 2/SOm. l/Sem. 2/Mes 1/Mes 4 Meses 1 Aflo

En 1993 En 1994

Uso del Archi vo Electronico

Nunca Raro Diario l /Sern, 2 / S e m . l / M e s 2 / M e s

US AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Corn paraci on Es f a d o Arch i vos Oficiales

/ # Gavetas con Arch. # Binders con Arch. 1

US AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Corn paracion Tiem po Usado para Copias

US AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESULTADO DEL ESTUDIO DE LOS ARCHIVOS

ARCHIVOS OFlClALES

0 PARA HACER

Binders de la bibiioteca no duplicado de archivos oficiales.

AGENCY FOR INTERNATION DEVELOPMENT CURRENT FILE OPERATIONAL COST

361 Mins daily x 30 copies per minutes = 10,830 copies

10,830 per day

copies (USSI

cents per copy

Approx. man-hour cost (based on FSN 516 wage) = RDS30.94 per hour x 6.02 hours daily = RDS 186.26 per day (USS14.91)

@ RD$2,352,26per day = US$ir88.79 - I I

This represents a n average cost per year of US$50,000

US AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COSTOS OPERACIONAL ES ACTUALES

Costo aproximado por hora de trabajo = RD$35.55/hora x 0.5 hora/dia RD$17.78/dia (US$1.42)

RD$120/dia + RD$17.78/dia = RD$137.78/dia (US$11.02) Esto es un costo anual aproxirnado de US$2,900

Lo que representa ahorros estimados por ar7o de US$47,100

DESCENTRALIZACION DE ARCHIVOS

I GDO

I - Family Planning and Health - Development Training Project ll

1 - PVO Co-Financing Project - Private lnitiatives in Primary Education

I PDI

I -National Accounts, Phase II -Economic Policy and Practice

i -Investment and Trade Expansion Program -Economic Education

I -Democratic Initiatives -Electoral Reform

1 -Electrical Energy Sector Restructuring

0 . -University Agribusiness Partnership Project

I -Trade Practice and Productivity Improvement -Integrated Pest Management Project

I -Small and ~ ic robus iness

nomenclaturas

\ / File Cust. \ / Ver doc. \ Distri bucion recibe la a traves del

copia firmad TS (F6), corn pletar y salvar

\ en el EFS 1

OUT

OF ENT

NuMehR ORIGINATOR OR A D D R E I I E E

?ILK CLA88lCICATlON OR 8UBJLCT

D A T E CHARQCD

CHARQCO TO (Nuno. ONloo, ~d Room NO.)

.' /

O A T S R I T U R N L C

MONITORING

Division:

Project No./Name:

PROJECT DEVELOPnENT

F e a s i b i l i t y Study

Market Survey

Pre-PI0 Document, Misc.

* File Custodian Support Team

* Que se puede hacer con el Sistema de Archivo de Proyectos

* Proyecciones

ANNEX E

Annex E

DRAFT MISSION ORDER MANUAL

Subject: Project Files System

I. Purpose: To delineate the procedures for the establishment and maintenance of the USAID/DR Project Files System.

11. Policy: To establish and maintain a Project Files System, physical and electronic, with adequate controls for all official project documents generated and received in USAID/DR, that is complete, accessible, agile, measurable, reliable, responsive to users' needs and complies with the Handbook 21 regulations.

111. Personnel : As per Handbook 21, Part 11, 1E2., the Mission Director is

responsible for implementing effective records management procedures within USAID/DR. To accomplish records management responsibilities, the Mission Director designates the Chief of the Management Office (MGT) as the Records Management Liaison Officer (RMLO). The Chief of MGT subsequently redesignates the RMLO responsibilities for supervising implementation of the USAID Files System to the Correspondence & Records Supervisor.

Files Custodian Sumort Team (FCSTI -- The FCST is composed of a Files Custodian from each USAID/DR office (assigned by each office chief) and a representative from C&R. The FCST is responsible for the Project Files System (both physical and electronic files). The FCST is to meet on a regular schedule (at least monthly) to discuss and act on matters concerning the operation (including monitoring), maintenance and improvement of the Project Files System. Before any major improvements developed by the FCST are implemented, they will be forwarded as recommendations to the Office of the Director.

IV. Procedures :

a) official Prdject File Documentation: As per MOM 111-2.2 - MGT/C&R Unit Services, I1 A - Responsibilities, "Office Chiefs are responsible for assuring that prompt and responsive action is taken on incoming communications. The action office must send to C&R any official communications received directly for control and proce~sing.~

b) Physical Project File8 Decentraliration: The official physical project files are located in the Technical Offices and are controlled by the Files Custodian of each office. In addition to maintaining

the official physical project files, every official project document generated in USAID/DR is included in the ~lectronic Files System (EFS).

1. Physical File Procedures: Each official document is filed by the Files Custodian of each office, following Handbook 21 regulations. The Files Custodian is responsible for updating and maintaining all project files.

b) Electronic Project Files: USAID/DR has installed in its computer system on the Local Area Network (LAN) an Electronic Files System (EFS) to complement the official physical project files. The EFS is based on Lotus Magellan software and enables users to access and use (view, print, and copy) the USAID/DR generated official project documents.

1. Electronic Filing Procedures:

Document Identification: Maintaining the correct identification of an electronic document through the point at which it is filed is very important to assure that the electronic filing process is efficient and to help safeguard the electronic files' integrity. Files Custodians, working with the staff in their offices, can assure USAID/DR procedures are followed in naming and maintaining computer files, especially while documents are in the clearance process. The file naming conventions described in USAID Notice 94-02, October 18, 1993, will be followed for all official project documents, with the originating office adding its designated prefix letter whenever a computer file is placed in the LAN's Public directory. Once created, the computer file name for a document in clearance is not to be changed and the file name is to be included at the end of each document. E-mail which communicates significant project implementation decisions is to be included as an official project document and should be named before being filed. USAID/DR cables are to be

filed using the Santo Domingo cable number plus the extension gg.SDM for the file name.

1.2 Doctrack and EFS: In USAID/DR there is a Document Tracking System (Doctrack). This system electronically tracks the routing of documents that are circulated to different offices for review and/or clearance. When an office sends a physical document for action/clearance, it is entered electronically into a Doctrack record which shows the document type, computer file name and routing. As each office receives a document, the Doctrack record is updated to show the location of the document. When an office finishes their work with the document, the Doctrack record is again updated indicating what action was taken by the office and to what office the document has been sent. In this way, the document follows its specific routing and can be located at any time. After the document has finished the clearance and signature process, it is sent to PDO for dating and numbering as needed, as well as distribution (physical distribution as required and electronic distribution whenever possible), including to the originating office. The originating office is to appropriately file the document and close out the Doctrack record. This includes indicating in the Doctrack record that the document has been placed in the USAID/DRgs physical and electronic files.

It is at this step that the Files Custodian is to assure that the document being filed electronically matches the final physical version of the document.

Project files are filed electronically into the appropriate EFS computer sub- directories which are named and arranged as per Handbook 21 guidance (Basic Project Documents File Arrangement).

Using the EFS menus and commands, LAN users can easily locate, copy and print any project document in the EFS system.

1.3 Becurity: Physical Project Files -- All official project documents are kept in file cabinets in their respective technical office, filed according to Handbook 21 regulations, and maintained by the Files Custodian of that office. The file cabinets used are to have a locking bar neChanism and are to be locked each day at close of business. Each official project file folder is to be taped with a bright orange tape on its front and back to help in easy identification. All official project documents may be checked out using a charge card that is readily available from the responsible Files Custodian for that purpose.

Electronic Project Files -- Only Files Custodians can EFS perform the EFS filing functions. The LAN system administrators will give modify access to the Files Custodians of each office. These individuals will be the ones with the authority to make the changes in the project sub-directories corresponding to the projects of their office. All other users only have access to read and copy the EFS files.

c) Monitoring:

1. Individual Project Documents

CCR in coordination with and with the support of the Files Custodians is to regularly monitor the project files system. Handbook 21 and the Doctrack system serve as a basis for this monitoring. Handbook 21 regulations are the guide for files organization and handling procedures. Doctrack is the basis from which project documentation is monitored. Periodically, CCR will work with the files custodians to review the content and organization of the project files system. At times this monitoring will be done based upon a random sample

of new project documents generated from Doctrack reports. At other times the monitoring will be done based on a random sample of all the documents of a given project. Both the physical project files and the electronic files will be reviewed for completeness and compliance with Handbook 21 requirements. CtR is to keep records of all monitoring activities. All file system problems encountered in the monitoring process are to be categorized by the monitoring team (C&R and Files Custodian) as either a l@random@l or as a possible wcommonw problem. "RandomI1 problems are to be resolved by the Files Custodian. Those categorized as possible ucommonM problems are to be referred to the FCST for further consideration. If the FCST determines that a problem is wcommon@@, then a subteam is to be formed from the FCST and is to use the Plan-Do-Check-Act methodology to resolve the problem.

2. Project Files System

Periodically (at least every year), the FCST will evaluate the Project Files System using the USAID/DR Files System Policy (Section 11) as a basis against which to measure its performance. The evaluation will include a survey of users, of both physical and electronic files, and the measurement of costs using objectively verifiable indicators, e.g. USAID/DR paper use, copying costs (labor and materials), and project files maintenance. A report on the results of the evaluation will be presented to the Chief, MGT for review and a copy sent to the Director.

I January 27, 1994 a t 8:54 am File: U:\URGARLAN\DOCS\FCSf\PRJFISYSSm3W