|
CoSA home |
CoSA Site Map
| COSHRC Minutes
PDF
version
COUNCIL OF STATE HISTORICAL RECORDS COORDINATORS
MINUTES
Holiday Inn Select
Decatur, Georgia
Sunday, April 30, 2000
1. The meeting was called to order
by Steering Committee Chairman Guy Rocha (Nevada) at 8:30 a.m. Steering
Committee Secretary. H.T. Holmes (Mississippi) called the roll of states
and territories. Forty states and territories reported present:
Alabama (Edwin C. Bridges)
Alaska
(John Stewart)
American Samoa (James B. Himphill)
Arizona (David H. Hoober)
California (Walter P. Gray)
Delaware (Howard P. Lowell)
Georgia (Bob White)
Hawaii (Luella Kurkjian)
Idaho (Steve Walker)
Indiana (F. Gerald Handfield)
Iowa (Gordon Hendrickson)
Kansas (David A. Haury)
Kentucky (Richard Belding)
Maine (James Henderson)
Massachusetts (Jack Warner)
Michigan (Sandra Clark)
Minnesota (Robert Horton)
Mississippi (H.T. Holmes)
Missouri (Laura Wilson)
Montana (Kathryn Otto)
Nebraska (Andrea I. Faling)
Nevada (Guy Louis Rocha)
New Hampshire (Frank C. Mevers)
New Mexico (L. Elaine Olah)
New York (Kathleen Roe)
North Carolina (Cathy J. Morris)
North Dakota ((Gerald G. Newborg)
Ohio (George Parkinson)
Pennsylvania (Diane Smith Wallace)
Rhode Island (R. Gwenn Stearn)
South Carolina (Roy H. Tryon)
Tennessee (William Moss)
Texas (Chris LaPlante)
Utah (Jeffery Johnson)
Vermont (Christopher Burns)
Virginia (Conley Edwards)
Washington (Philip Coombs)
West Virginia (Frederick H.
Armstrong)
Wisconsin (Peter Gottlieb)
Wyoming (Tony Adams)
Rocha (Nevada) reviewed the proposed
agenda for the meeting which was accepted without change.
1. Call to Order
Roll Call of the States and
Territories
Review Agenda
2. Approve COSHRC minutes from
January 30, 1999 (Rosslyn, Virginia) and July 17, 1999 (Columbus, Ohio)
3. Elections
4. COSHRC Archives
5. COSHRC Self-Study
6. Status Report on Current NFACE
Grants
7. Proposed COSHRC Administrative
Grant
8. Presentation/Discussion of
"A Strategic Vision for the NHPRC"
9. NFACE Follow-Up/Action Agenda
10. Meeting Place and Dates for
2001 Meeting
11. Other Business
2. Minutes for the January 30, 1999,
COSHRC meeting in Rosslyn, Virginia, were presented. Sandra Clark (Michigan)
moved adoption, seconded by Jack Warner (Massachusetts). Without objection,
the minutes were approved.
Minutes for the July 17, 1999, COSHRC
meeting in Columbus, Ohio, were presented. Howard Lowell (Delaware) moved
adoption, seconded by Gerald Newborg (North Dakota). Without objection,
the minutes were approved.
3. Richard Belding (Kentucky) presented
a report from the Nominating Committee, composed of the three immediate
past presidents. Two district elections will be held by mail before the
COSHRC meeting in conjunction with NAGARA. The committee reported nominees
for
Region I Walter Gray (California)
Region IV H.T. Holmes (Mississippi)
There were no nominations from the
floor. Belding reminded the Council that write-in-candidates were allowed
in the voting process.
4. Holmes (Mississippi) presented
a report on the status of establishing a COSHRC archives. A telephone
survey of some past Steering Committee Chairs indicated that sufficient
records do exist to form an archives, but that several issues need further
discussion. Vicki Walch, COSHRC consultant for several projects, retains
the largest number of records and has expressed the desire to remove them
from her custody to that of COSHRC. Walch reported that migration problems
may exist for some of the electronic records. Gordon Hendrickson (Iowa)
suggested a college and university setting for COSHRC archives, perhaps
an institution holding records of other archives groups. Hendrickson agreed
to receive the Walch material on a temporary basis until the COSHRC archives
are established and housed. Gerald Handfield (Indiana) suggested that
the outgoing Steering Committee chair draft records disposition schedules
for the COSHRC records created during his tenure. After vocal protest
from the outgoing chair, Handfield withdrew the motion.
5. James Henderson (Maine) presented
a draft for the COSHRC self-study, to which the Council obligated itself
in NHPRC Grant# 99-025.
COSHRC Self Study 2000
Assessment for an Action Agenda
The Charge
In 1999 COSHRC submitted a grant
application to NHPRC for several activities including a "self-study
evaluation" of the Council. The NHPRC has designated a performance
objective for this portion of the grant suggesting the general contents
of the study, the results of which are due to NHPRC by March
31, 2001.
This Assessment contains a brief
background on the Council and the evaluation requirements. Each
member of the Council should review the sample assessment
elements and add/delete/modify at will. These ARE samples to
stimulate thought. Edit within the document, if possible, clearly
noting changes.
Return this document, annotated,
to james.henderson@state.me.us by June 2, 2000. Responses will be
compiled into a draft report for Council review and for final Steering
Committee approval.
NHPRC Grant Proposal
Under the heading "Evaluation
Of The Project/Ongoing Efforts," COSHRC'S proposal to NHPRC stated
the following:
During the grant project, the
Council will devote some time to self-study, exploring how it might
more fully institutionalize operations, bringing greater effectiveness
to its administrative efforts, and clarifying its future work with
the NHPRC. Specifically, this means evaluating the structure of
its regional representation, creating greater bureaucratic guidelines
to support transitory leadership (including the development of an
institutional archives); creating an organizational web-site, and
analyzing COSHRC's relationship with the NHPRC with the object of
fashioning a new cooperative agreement between the two.
NHPRC Performance Objective
While "additions or modifications"
are permitted, the performance objective for this portion of Grant
# 99-025 is to
Prepare and distribute to Council
membership and Commission a Council self-study evaluating the Council's
organizational structure and the nature of its future relationship
to NHPRC.
What Does COSHRC Want to Achieve
with this Assessment?
Presumably, the Coordinators
want an organization that can deliver on their expectations for
collective action and for outcomes that improve their own state
programs. With a clear vision of those expectations ("mission,"
"vision") and a plan to support them, Coordinators will soon know
whether the financial and organizational resources are realistically
available or not. In either event, the Council and its members can
assess the degree to which it can perform a useful role given the
time and other commitments of the Coordinators.
The Approach
A strategic planning model provides
the structure and elements that organize this evaluation. Before
focusing on the Council's organizational structure, we will identify
the key outcomes or "vision of success" that the Council is seeking,
then determine what organizational structure is needed to support
them.
Our "Vision of Success" might
include circumstances in which
- NHPRC grant priorities reflect
the Council's recommendations;
- Regrants to states continue
and are expanded;
- An increasing and measurable
portion of America's historical records are preserved, accessible,
and used each year;
- The Council conducts joint
projects of general interest to Council members;
- NHPRC has adequate funding
for Council priorities.
The Process
The self-study requires clarifying
our "Mission" and "Vision of Success," assessing our organizational
strengths and weaknesses, considering external environmental factors,
and developing a preferred strategy with associated objectives.
Without getting into the details
of specific activities, which will change from year to year, the Council
will revisit its "strengths and weaknesses" in order to recommend the
resources and organizational changes, if any, that should be made to
achieve its strategic objectives.
The "Assessment" section will bethe
vehicle for member comments and contributions. From these, a preliminary
draft self-study report will be developed and submitted to the Council
members via the COSHRC-L listserve. Comments on the draft will be integrated
into a final draft for Steering Committee revision and adoption.
All communications will be via e-mail.
All comments and suggested revisions will be by edits to the circulated
documents, with a preference for using the MS-Word "track changes" option
that includes underlines for added text and strike-out for deleted text.
(This is essential for an efficient, tightly managed process. Many thanks
in advance!)
A Schedule of Planning Activities
| April 19 |
This Assessment
plan sent by e-mail to all Coordinators. |
| April 29 |
Brief discussion
of the plan at COSHRC meeting in Decatur, Ga.; if time allows,
consider whether agreement can be reached on the Mission Statement. |
| May 1 |
If necessary,
distribute revised Assessment plan by e-mail to all Coordinators
and former members of the Steering Committee. |
| June 2 |
Deadline to receive
substantive Assessment comments and contributions. |
| June 15 |
Distribute preliminary
draft Assessment to COSHRC-L listserve for comment. |
| June 30 |
Deadline to receive
comments on preliminary draft Assessment. |
| July 12 |
Distribute draft
self-study report to Steering Committee. |
| July 20 |
Steering Committee
revises and adopts self-study report at NAGARA. |
The Assessment
This section includes initial sample
content and an organizational scheme for comments. The Mission, Vision,
Environmental and Strategies sections develop the functions COSHRC
wishes to perform. These imply the required resources and organizational
changes in the section following the functional analysis.
Mission
The Council was created in 1989
with the following stated mission:
To promote the preservation and
access of the documentary heritage of the United States through the
development of strong, cooperative, public and private historical
records programs in the states and territories of the United States
in cooperation with the National Historical Publications and Records
commission, through reciprocal support, advice, and collaboration.
Is this still sufficient as a general
statement of our mission? If not, what specific changes do you recommend?
Vision of Success
Organizational Assessment
What are the current strengths
and weaknesses of COSHRC as an organization that assist or inhibit
its ability to accomplish its mission?
Strengths
- Broad representation
- Collective influence with NHPRC
and other resource allocators
Weaknesses
- Weak institutional memory -
no accessible archives
- No annual budget with dependable,
predictable revenue
- No clear set of priorities,
objectives
- No paid staff
Assessment of External Factors
What external factors assist
or inhibit COSHRC's ability to accomplish its mission? What opportunities
or threats to they pose?
- Professional demands on Coordinators'
time
- Geographic separation of Coordinators
Strategies with associated Goals
and Objectives
Given the scope of this study,
COSHRC recognizes that it can propose strategies, but only briefly
suggest goals and objectives realizing that they will require significant
resources.
Definitions
Strategies are sets of goals
and objectives supporting our mission.
Goals and Objectives directly
support our mission. While goals may be somewhat general, objectives
should be SMART: S-pecific, M-easurable, R-ealistic, A-chievable,
and T-ime based.
COSHRC Strategies with brief reference
to Goals and Objectives
Provide organizations within
the states with the knowledge and materials necessary to preserve
and provide access to important historical records
Continue Regrant program
Provide Coordinators with "best
practices" tools for potential application in their states
Create web site with rich resources
in this area
Continue special projects such
as NFACE
Encourage use of historical records;
demonstrate their importance, possibly with local "documentary editions."
Provide forums for communication
among Coordinators
Create web site with rich resources
in this area
Continue at least annual meetings
among Coordinators and with NHPRC staff
Coordinate communication with
the Administration and members of Congress
Clearly evaluate and communicate
the effect of Regrant projects to NHPRC
Create a mechanism to measure
the increase in the number of historical records preserved and
provided access through COSHRC and NHPRC initiatives in five year
periods
Insure annual reports of necessary
statistics be received by October 1st and summarized by November
1st.
Recommended Resources and Organizational
Changes
Based on the functional assessment
of COSHRC, what organizational changes and resources, if any, are
necessary to achieve its strategic objectives?
Organizational Changes
Dissolve the Council and redirect
resources to NAGARA
Provide a stipend to Steering
Committee Members
Create a position of paid Executive
Director
Resources Needed
People
Recruit an Executive Director
Property
Time
Money
Establish an annual operating
budget
Knowledge and Technology
Create a web site with substantial
reference resources for Coordinators
Establish a physical location
for the Council Archives and make key archival material available
via a web site
Action Plan
An action plan will be adopted
by the Steering Committee before March 31, 2001 based on this assessment.
Henderson noted that the first two
pages of the draft were process oriented and that it was the last pages
that Council members needed to submit comments on according to the proposed
schedule. Discussion that followed centered upon the common vision shared
which, it was suggested, may become evident in the responses by the
states to the instrument; identification of a process to successfully
complete the study by the end of the summer; and opportunities for group
discussion. The use of e-mail was proposed for group discussion, but
the point was made that e-mail does not always provide an adequate forum
for balancing opposing views. The suggestion was made that responses
be posted as a way of opinion exchange. A consensus was reached to focus
on the mission and vision components before the July 2000 NAGARA meeting
and at NAGARA identify the next step to be taken.
Discussion then moved to consideration
of specific roles in the process. The question was raised as to the
role of NHPRC. Ann Newhall, NHPRC executive director, stated that NHPRC,
while wanting to be aware of the process, had no role to play in the
self-study. She further stated that NHPRC should be driven by the COSHRC
vision, and not the reverse. Peter Gottlieb, Steering Committee Vice-Chair,
suggested the Council has three options for the future:
1. Continue as for the past
five-six years, holding two meetings per year, providing a networking
environment, and sponsoring significant projects such as NFACE;
2. Stop sponsoring significant
projects and continue the networking environment by meeting once a
year; or
3. Transform to an organization
with a national program.
After some discussion, a straw poll
of the group was taken. Number 1 received 1 vote, Number 2 received
3 votes, Number 3 received twenty-something votes, and 1 vote was registered
for "Other." Gottlieb suggested that before the July 2000
NAGARA meeting Council members provide e-mail feedback on pages 3-4
of the draft and further suggested that the responses be electronically
posted. Henderson, who serves as COSHRC’s electronic postman, requested
that responses be as brief as possible and that Council members try
to adhere to the dates in the draft schedule. Henderson was requested
to redistribute the draft after modifications suggested in the discussion
had been made.
6. Rocha (Nevada) briefly reported
on the status of the two NFACE grants, that all was in order. He requested
that meeting attendees submit their expenses statements by May 10 so that
residual monies could be determined and plans for follow-up NFACE action
could be made.
7. Gottlieb reported on the current
status of proposal development for the next NHPRC administrative grant,
which will cover Council activities through the year 2001. This grant
will serve as a "bridge" grant while COSHRC completes its self-study
and determines its future agenda. This bridge grant will address funding
for two meetings as well as resources needed to maintain the NFACE Web
site until COSHRC’s new agenda is determined. Upon motion by Roy Tryon
(Delaware), with a second by Steve Walker (Idaho), Gottlieb’s grant proposal
suggestions were endorsed without objection. Howard Lowell (Delaware)
abstained.
8. Ann Newhall presented "A
Strategic Vision for NHPRC."
Newhall reported that NHPRC had
set aside $600,000 for each of the next three years for proposals
to broaden archivists’ expertise with electronic records and up to
$300,000 to support research into software-independent electronic
records preservation at a scale that can utilized by archival programs
smaller than NARA.
Newhall informed the Council that
updated guidelines are being printed and one copy will be sent to
Council members in the following week and that new pamphlets are also
available. Newhall reminded Council that new state board grant support
up to $10,000 is now available for administrative support.
The question of the value of COSHRC
endorsement of the vision statement was posed. Newhall said that endorsement
may not necessarily help but would not hurt and that NHPRC was soliciting
feedback not endorsement. Lowell (Delaware), NAGARA representative
on NHPRC, said that as a commissioner he was listening closely to
the discussion. Newhall was reminded of NHPRC legislative mandate
to report on planning of preservation of nation’s records, which has
been institutionalized process with reports every two years. The suggestion
was offered that that report could be expanded in the strategic vision.
The problem of implementing NHPRC initiatives in the states without
funds for hiring staff to do so was discussed. A proposal was put
forward to provide $50,000 (sufficient for 1 staff member) for small
states and $100,000 (sufficient for 2 staff members) for large states.
Newhall responded that current appropriation levels for NHPRC could
not support such a proposal. The question was raised of the possibility
of raising additional funds beyond the congressional appropriation.
Newhall responded that the position of the Archivist of the United
States was that solicitation of such funds be carefully handled so
that the level of congressional appropriations will not be reduced.
She indicated that NHPRC may look at assisting their constituents
in seeking additional funds for their projects. The state humanities
councils and state historical preservation officers were proposed
as good examples for NHPRC to consider when planning administrative
support. Support of that kind would allow COSHRC to play the more
significant role it needs to play. Newhall agreed that COSHRC needs
to play a more significant role, but said that a formula for distribution
of support funds would be difficult to devise. The idea was put forth
that COSHRC support inclusion of state support in the next NHPRC reauthorization
cycle, but that COSHRC needs to develop a consensus in order to be
an effective advocate for such support. Newhall was reminded that
NHPRC has asked the states to use their own resources to carry out
NHPRC initiatives. Newhall agreed.
Philip Coombs (Washington) moved
that COSHRC endorse the strategic vision as presented. Seconded by
Kenneth Winn (Missouri), the motion passed without objection. Howard
Lowell (Delaware) abstained. Gottlieb (Wisconsin) requested that the
minutes "capture the stream" of the foregoing discussion
of state support as an ongoing discussion.
9. Rocha (Nevada) thanked those
persons responsible for the successful completion of NFACE, especially
Kathleen Roe (New York) and project consultant Vicki Walch. Vice-Chair
Gottlieb (Wisconsin) provided a summary of the previous afternoon’s NFACE
recapitulation and analysis activities. The NFACE program committee met
for two hours and then met with the Steering Committee where they provided
a summary of the priority actions coming out of NFACE. Roe (New York)
presented to the Council a summary of the actions. She reported that a
total of ninety priority actions were recommended by the forum, and that
fifty of those ninety actions had commitments for follow-up activity.
The program committee had selected from those ninety items only those
actions that dealt with a national agenda. Walch presented the national
agenda items.
Components of NFACE
Action Agenda
1. Creation of a nationwide information
clearinghouse.
2. Creation of a standard curriculum
for training grassroots/volunteer archivists.
3. Encourage collaboration/coordination/information
exchange on archival continuing education issues including information
on the following specific areas:
a. Digital collections
b. Advocacy/public education
c. Preservation/conservation
d. Reference
4. Creating a diverse and well
educated next generation of archival leadership.
5. Identifying short term and
sustainable funding for collaborative archival education initiatives.
6. Research and evaluation based
on existing and ongoing survey data to identify gaps in archival education.
7. Base archival continuing education
on adult learning practices.
8. Utilize best practice methodology
to identify and incorporate best practices in archival continuing education
identification of range of education offerings (beginner/grassroots,
professional, so forth).
9. Support existing NHPRC initiative
broadening the base and depth of electronic records training.
Roe (New York) reported that continuing
follow-up activities will include a meeting of four major national associations
— AASLH, COSHRC, NAGARA, SAA — at the July 2000 NAGARA meeting, as well
as a round table meeting of educational coordinators at NAGARA. On a motion
by Roy Tryon (South Carolina), seconded by Gerry Handfield (Indiana),
the Council expressed its thanks to all parties involved in the NFACE
project. Without objection, the motion carried. Gottlieb said that a refined
version of the NFACE agenda would be available at the July 2000 NAGARA
meeting.
10. Gottlieb (Wisconsin) reported
that plans for the 2001 COSHRC meetings are for a meeting in January 2001
in Rosslyn, Virginia, and in July 2001 in conjunction with the NAGARA
annual meeting.
11. Gwenn Stearn (Rhode Island),
on a point of information, spoke of the NEH initiative for regional humanities
centers, the need for each coordinator to be involved in that planning
in his region, and that COSHRC survey data should be available for the
initiative. Council members were reminded of the May 10 deadline for submitting
travel expenses and evaluations, as well as a June 2 deadline for submitting
self-study comments to Henderson (Maine). Rocha (Nevada) expressed his
thanks to Richard Cameron (NHPRC) and the COSHRC Steering Committee for
their assistance to him during the previous months, and suggested that
the Steering Committee continue the new practice of electing a vice-chair.
Chairman Rocha adjourned the meeting
at 11:20 a.m.
H.T. Holmes, Secretary
|
