Principle 7 of the Information Management Standard requires that business information is saved in systems where it can be appropriately managed. Many agencies use Electronic Document and Records Management Systems (EDRMS) to manage records, which are designed with appropriate functionality to keep records safe and secure. However, when moving records from a system, care is required to ensure the completeness and integrity of records are maintained.
This advice outlines issues to consider when moving records out of an EDRMS. It draws on the Digital Preservation Coalition’s EDRMS Preservation Toolkit (DPC toolkit), developed with input from many members including National Archives of Australia. While National Archives does not formally endorse the toolkit, as not all aspects are relevant to Australian Government agencies, it is a useful source of best practice and advice. Links are included in this document where relevant.
Why records move
There can be different drivers for exporting or moving records from an EDRMS as part of sound information management practices so that records remain well-managed and available to support business needs. These may include:
- Transferring digital records to the National Archives after sentencing as Retain as National Archives in accordance with an approved records authority. Action 14 of the Building trust in the public record policy specifies that ‘retain as national archives’ information assets must be transferred to the care of the National Archives as soon as practicable, or within 15 years of creation. This is required by the Archives Act 1983.
- System replacement, for example migrating to a new EDRMS. Action 16 of the Building trust in the public record policy recommends identifying poorly performing legacy systems; addressing information management requirements when upgrading, migrating and/or decommissioning systems to meet business needs.
- Transferring records to a different agency as a result of administrative change.
Planning
Any movement of records needs to be planned to ensure alignment with business needs and accountability requirements; and with governance and project management appropriate to the size, scale and level of risk of the task.
When developing a project plan, consider:
What
What records are in scope? All the records in the EDRMS? A subset relating to a particular function, or identified as Retain as National Archives for transfer to the National Archives? If a subset, how are these records identified? The DPC toolkit contains questions to understand the records and the processes that created them.
Where
Where are the records currently? What system? What do you know about that system? Where are they being transferred (i.e. destination system / another agency / National Archives)?
When
Are there any deadlines or timeframes to be met? Have all stakeholders agreed to those timeframes?
Why
What is the driver for the move, e.g. decommissioning / system replacement, outcome of sentencing activity, transfer of records to a new agency following machinery of government change?
How
How will the move be achieved? What resources and skills are available to guide this process? What system functionality exists to support export? What delivery mechanisms will be used to transfer the records? Will additional functionality / tools be required? The DPC toolkit contains questions to understand the technical infrastructure, particularly questions related to export functionality.
Who
Who are the key stakeholders? For example, a RACI analysis (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed) is a common way of identifying stakeholders and their interests. The DPC toolkit suggests stakeholders to consider.
Issues to consider
The table below outlines some of the issues that your agency should consider when planning the movement of records from an EDRMS. It outlines why the issue may present risks to the completeness and integrity of the records, and questions to ask to investigate further.
It is assumed that the destination system has appropriate recordkeeping functionality.
The appropriate approach to each of these factors will depend on the reason the records are being moved, the value of the records, and the capabilities and configurations of both the originating and target system / environment. Standard risk assessment techniques can be used to identify the level of risk and appropriate mitigations.
| Issue | What's the risk? | Points to check |
|---|---|---|
| Metadata | Without metadata – such as dates, author / creator, use information, classification, disposal and sentencing, records can lose meaning and integrity. |
What metadata has been captured in the current system? Can you map it to new system? Are there different metadata profiles for different record types? How will this be mapped? If metadata will continue to be added / accrued in the new system, will definitions of metadata fields be consistent in the new environment? What validation checks will be implemented to ensure metadata has been migrated correctly, e.g. that date of creation has not been changed to migration date. The DPC toolkit contains prompts to consider the value of different types of metadata. At a minimum, the nine properties of the minimum metadata set of the Australian Government Recordkeeping Metadata Standard 2.2 (AGRkMS) must be retained. |
| Workflow | If used for approvals, workflows document decisions. Without this information records are incomplete | Have you implemented workflow processes within the system to show decisions and approvals? If so, this workflow metadata will need to be exported with the record |
| Version management | While some drafts are of transitory value, others that show significant annotations or alterations that inform the final decision should be retained as part of the record. Relevant records authorities and disposal freezes may also refer to drafts that cannot be destroyed. |
What does your information management policies and guidance say about version control and management? How have document versions or revisions been managed? Have they been created as versions of one document, or as separate documents? Is it sufficient to export only the final version, or cumulative revisions? The DPC toolkit provides additional information on this challenge. |
| Structure | To be full and accurate, records must comprise content, context and structure. EDRMS can be implemented with various structures that document the context of the record. | What structures e.g. folders / files, file containers, record types, group or team-based sub-sites, etc have been used to give meaning and context to the records? Will information about these be exported as metadata, or in a different form? |
| Formats | EDRMS can hold records in multiple file formats and often have inbuilt viewers to provide access. There may be a risk of losing access when records are moved. | What formats are the records in? If there are unusual or older formats, does the destination system / environment have the technology to view and render these? Do some records in older formats need to be migrated into newer ones? The DPC toolkit provides advice on understanding the digital objects and, if considering migration to other formats, refer to National Archives’ Born-digital file format standards. |
| Audit history information | Audit history is a specific type of metadata and can be voluminous and difficult to manage and store. However, it can be essential for proving the authenticity and integrity of records | How is the audit history information managed / structured? Can it be exported as metadata to the destination system? How valuable is the audit information to understand use of the records? What is the risk to authenticity of the records if it is not retained? |
More information
The Digital Preservation Coalition’s EDRMS Digital Preservation Toolkit contains a range of case studies and scenarios on managing EDRMS records over time. While not been formally endorsed by National Archives, it is a source of useful best practice advice.
For more advice on transferring records to the National Archives or another agency, read transferring information.
For advice on ensuring appropriate functionality of systems, including EDRMS and Microsoft 365, read systems that manage information. In particular, the Business System Assessment Framework provides Australian Government agencies with a consistent, streamlined and risk-based approach to the assessment of information management functionality in business systems and compliance with metadata standards.
Contact us
For further help and advice, contact the Agency Service Centre.