|
|
Records
Retention Schedules for |
Home Page | Table of Contents | Categories, subjects and schedules | List of schedules | Index
Home Page | Table of Contents | Categories, subjects and schedules | List of schedules | Index |
|
Table of Contents 1. OVERVIEW 1.1 Working Group mandate and membership 1.2.1 Records retention schedules 1.2.3 Life cycle of the record 1.2.4 Primary and secondary copies 1.3 Development of The Quebec Schedules 1.3.1 Participants and responsibilities 1.3.2 Methodological considerations 2.1 Retention schedules structure 2.1.1 List of categories and subjects 2.1.2 Retention schedule numbering 2.2 Retention schedule information elements 2.2.1 Retention schedule number 2.2.2 Identification of record or record series 2.2.5 Retention period and notes 2.3 Using The Quebec Schedules 2.3.2 Using the printed version of The Quebec Schedules 2.3.3 Using the on-line version of The Quebec Schedules LIST OF PRINCIPAL SOURCES CONSULTED
[Editors’ Note: La gestion des archives informatiques is a study of electronic records issues and proposed solutions was produced by the CREPUQ Archivists Sub-Committee, and published by the Presses de l'Université du Québec in 1994]. Well before the implementation of the Archives Act[i], Quebec universities have played a crucial role in the development and application of retention schedules, including the early integration of these instruments into the management of archives. By 1985, CREPUQ had produced the first ediction of the Calendrier-type de conservation des documents on behalf Quebec universities. [Editors’ Note: Le calendrier type was the first edition of collected “model” or typical retention schedules for Quebec academic institutions, published by CREPUQ in 1985; note that all subsequent references to the Archives Act refer to Quebec's Archives Act R.S.Q., A-21.I.] Since the Archives Act Quebec archivists in other sectors have developed retention schedules based on the Calendrier-type and examples established by Quebec university archives. These sectors have included health and social service institutions, municipal courts, police services, school boards and CEGEPS, each working together to develop retention schedules as well as criteria for the selection of records for permanent retention. This edition of The Quebec Schedules also incorporates developments in archival science emerging since earlier editions and integrates comments from the Archives nationales du Québec. It is hoped that this edition will encourage Quebec academic institutions to develop new or revise existing schedules and greatly facilitate communication on retention schedule approval with the Archives nationales du Québec. It should be noted that the current edition, like its predecessors, sets out minimum retention periods that may be accepted as written or adjusted to suit institutional practices. While the retention periods for active and semi-active records may be modified to suit institutional needs, the disposition of inactive records as presented in each of the schedules (destruction, further selection at archives, or retention) is strongly recommended. This recommendation serves the interests of establishing uniformity in documentation available throughout various archival holdings of Quebec’s universities. 1.1 Working Group mandate and membership In order to meet the records management needs of Quebec universities and reflect articles 7 and 8 of the Archives Act, CREPUQ’s Secretaries-General Committee directed its Archivists Sub-committee to develop a new edition of records schedules incorporating developments in both Quebec law and archival practice. On February 3, 2000, the CREPUQ Archivists Sub-committee set up a Working Group to carry out this task. The group was composed of:
CREPUQ delegated responsibility for the project to the Archives and Records Management Service of the Université du Québec à Montréal and to André Gareau, Archivist at UQAM. They were to revise and complete the retention schedules in the second edition of CREPUQ’s Calendrier-type de conservation des documents (1986) and in La gestion des archives informatiques (1994). 1.2.1 Records retention schedules A brief look at the theoretical framework will provide a clearer understanding of retention scheduling, both as an effective tool for universities to comply with the Archives Act and as a key element of records management programming. Articles 7 and 8 of the Archives Act require every public institution to establish and keep current a retention schedule for its records:
Art. 8 – “[…] Every public body referred to in paragraphs 4 to 7 of the schedule [to this Act] shall, in accordance with the regulations, submit to the Minister, for approval, its retention schedule and any modification respecting the addition of new records or records scheduled for permanent preservation.” The Archives Act defines the term “archives” as “the body of records of all kinds, regardless of date, created or received by a person or body in meeting requirements or carrying on activities, preserved for their general information value”. Retention schedules are thus the principal elements in any records management program and constitute an institution’s official policy on the preservation and disposal of its records. They serve as a working tool describing standards for length of retention, and processing of records, from their creation to their destruction or transfer to the archives. By the term “record” we mean any information conveyed on a medium and intelligible in the form of words, sounds or images[ii]. The formulation of a records retention schedule must then meet several objectives:
The primary purpose of a collection of retention schedules is to provide a common basis for institutions in a given sector to develop their own retention schedules. The demands of the Archives Act and regulations emerging from it such as the Retention schedules, transfer, deposit and disposal of public archives (Regulation respecting the Archives Act R.S.Q. A-21.1,r.1), have underlined the need for published examples of retention schedules that will assist academic institutions in developing their own retention schedules. 1.2.3 Life cycle of the record [Editors’ Note: The definitions of active, semi-active, and inactive reflect those used in North American records management literature such as the Glossary of Records and Information Management Terms, 2nd Edition (2000) published by ARMA International. For those institutions that regard the semi-active and inactive as similar phases, the use of “inactive” here refers to a point at which final disposition of the records is assigned or determined. Readers should be aware that the retention recommendations may suggest workflows that are not applicable or reflective of all contexts - institutions are encouraged to adapt the schedules to existing circumstances and or workflows.] The evolution of a record’s value is reflected in the stages of its life cycle: active, semi-active and inactive. Active phase In the first phase of the life cycle, a record is used regularly by its creators. Such records are called ACTIVE. In this phase, the records are kept in the unit that created them, and are filed or organized according to a classification system for ease of access. Semi-active phase In the second phase of the life cycle, a record is used occasionally by its creators. Such records are called SEMI-ACTIVE. In the interests of freeing space and equipment, such records having ended their active phase are transferred the semi-active records centre of an archives. The unit transferring such records retains all rights in these records, and may borrow them or return them to regular use as is required. Inactive phase In the third phase a record is no longer used for administrative, legal or financial purposes. Such records are called INACTIVE. At this point records may be eliminated unless they have historical value (approximately 5% of the total records volume may have some historical value). Records that have historical value are transferred to the archives, and the transferring unit relinquishes jurisdiction over the records to the management of the archives. 1.2.4 Primary and secondary copies Each of the schedules determines the length of time records will be retained by dividing them into two categories: primary and secondary copies. The primary copy is the record that contains the most complete information on a given subject. The secondary copy, if any, derives from the primary copy and is used as a working tool for information or dissemination. They are usually portions or reproductions of the primary copy, and are kept for a much shorter time. 1.3 Development of The Quebec Schedules 1.3.1 Participants and responsibilities The Quebec Schedules is based on an analytical inventory of the retention schedules already in existence in Quebec universities and as such differs from the retention schedules developed in individual institutions. The preparation of this document required several phases and the participation of numerous colleagues. Development of The Quebec Schedules began with the project archivist’s analysis of records retention schedules used in various Quebec academic institutions. This was followed by a compilation identifying similar retention schedules that could be grouped together. On the basis of this compilation proposed schedules reflecting the individual schedules reviewed were drafted. The consultation process on the proposed schedules included review by the members of the Working Group as well as the members of the CREPUQ Archivists Sub-committee, representatives of the CREPUQ Legal Counsel Sub-committee, and finally submission to the representatives of the Archives nationales du Québec. All the comments obtained through this process were analysed by the Working Group, who then made a number of adjustments, amending, creating, grouping or withdrawing certain schedules. The final version of The Quebec Schedules was approved by the Archivists Sub-committee, by CREPUQ’s Secretaries-General Committee and (following a favourable recommendation by the Commission des biens culturels du Québec) the Archives nationales du Québec. [Editors' Note : The Commission des biens culturels su Québec is responsible for cultural property matters under Quebec's Cultural Property Act R.S.Q. B-4].1.3.2 Methodological considerations While The Quebec Schedules is intended to meet the needs of Quebec’s academic institutions, it does not cover every single administrative situation, and does not include schedules too specific to any one institution or record-keeping situation. This is especially the case for certain features of terminology and the division of responsibility among different units. Records pertaining to construction, for example, might not be dealt with in the same manner by every institution, and would therefore be subject to different retention schedules. This third edition of The Quebec Schedules (revised in the Fall of 2001) comprises a total of three hundred retention schedules, serving as a guide to each individual academic institution in developing and updating its own retention schedules. Since an organization’s retention schedules must accurately reflect that organization’s structures and activities, it is, by definition, UNIQUE; The Quebec Schedules will thus have to be adapted to the specific needs of each institution and each institution will have the responsibility to inventory their own records, consult their own managers and decide which of the schedules to adopt and or modify.
The schedules proposed here are general. They represent the result of an exercise in synthesizing, designed to group different records dealing with a similar subject, for which common retention periods can be established. Institutions are encouraged to formulate their own schedules by grouping them by retention schedule and characteristic features in order to facilitate their application (passage from active to semi-active to inactive, etc.). Caution will have to be exercised in applying certain schedules developed on the basis of particular record types (preparatory records, working records, subject-matter file, ad hoc file, liaison records, list, inventory, etc.). These schedules do not preclude the formulation of specific schedules by an institution for records whose management and retention necessitate such specificity (e.g. active and semi-active periods, transfer to archives). For this reason, the following caveat applies to each of the schedules: This schedule applies only to files or records whose subject is not covered by a specific retention schedule. Moreover, it is important to note that the provisions of certain schedules developed on the basis of record types have not been systematically carried over into each of the individual schedules concerned. For example, the need to retain policies, procedures and statistics, already covered in the general schedules, has not been repeated in each of the individual schedules on a given subject, although it remains applicable. The Quebec Schedules define minimum requirements. Each institution is free to take the necessary steps to adopt different retention schedules and present them to the Archives nationales du Québec, where for example it seeks to:
Schedules involving retention until the 100th anniversary of an individual’s birth may be applied differently according to the systems and resources of each institution (for example, an institution that does not have a system based on date of birth may establish a retention limit of eighty years from the date of transfer to the archives). To facilitate application of The Quebec Schedules the current fiscal year is already understood to be included in the proposed retention limit for records with financial implications [Editors' note: this means the retention limit is the number of years recommended AND the fiscal year in which the records were created]. It is also important to ensure that schedules with financial implications comply with generally accepted accounting principles, especially those that have tax implications for the institution as well as for third parties.In addition, each institution is responsible for the definitive submission of its retention schedules to the Archives nationales du Québec. Each institution must fill out the form for electronic records issued by the Archives nationales du Québec, entitled Établissement du calendrier de conservation des records informatiques d’un organisme public. The form enables institutions to spell out information that cannot be included in general schedules such as those in The Quebec Schedules (for example, lists of printouts, names of those responsible for the computer system, lists of data bases, etc.). [Editors’ Note: The name of the form, unofficially translated is the establishment of records retention scheduling for electronic records held by public organizations. These requirements apply only to Quebec.]Moreover, the onus is on academic institutions to remain abreast of the latest research and developments in the area of electronic records preservation, such as the InterPARES (International Research on Permanent Authentic Records in Electronic Systems) project. 1.3.3 Legal issuesAs mentioned above each of these retention schedules has been reviewed by CREPUQ’s Sub-committee of Legal Counsels. Institutions are however still required to review their requirements with their own legal advisors. And, though the advice of legal counsel taken in 2000-01 has been integrated into the formulation of the basic schedules presented here, constant developments in law, practice and technology warrant each institution’s seeking a new legal opinion. The Quebec Schedules were formulated in light of a number of legal implications, including:
[Editors’ Note: The Guide noted above concerns digital imaging, and was produced by the Archives nationales du Québec. Also note that references to “personal information files management”, as in Schedule 1.57, should not be confused with the term “Personal Information Banks” or PIBs used in other jurisdictions. In the Quebec context, this Schedule refers to the organization’s method or sequence of actions required to comply with the privacy and access regulations and not the disposition of the data banks themselves.] 2.1 Retention schedules structure The Quebec Schedules comprises three hundred retention schedules, grouped by category based on the principal activities of academic institutions. Within each category, schedules are grouped by subject.2.1.1 List of categories and subjects [Editors’ Note: Regarding the terminology used as category names and as subjects, the terms “administration” and “administrative” are intended in their broadest descriptive sense, referring to management of activities and functions as distinct from academic activities. The use of this term does not presuppose the existence of “operational” categories, as often used in records or file classification plans The title “Research and development” is intended to refer to work in the scientific, artistic, and humanities and should not be interpreted as solely related to scientific and/or commercial endeavours. While the term “creation” in the original French title “recherche et création” includes notions of creator and/or authorship associated with artistic and non-scientific works, no suitable term with the same broad resonance as “research and development” was identified. Note also that the use of the term “development” does not include fundraising or “advancement” activities – these functions are described under schedules dealing with fundraising in 02 Financial Resources.] 01. ADMINISTRATION
02. HUMAN RESOURCES
03. FINANCIAL RESOURCES
04. REAL AND MOVABLE PROPERTY
05. STUDENT AFFAIRS
06. COMMUNITY SERVICES
07. TEACHING
09. INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS
2.1.2 Retention schedule numbering Each of the schedules in The Quebec Schedules is identified by a number composed of the category number of the records concerned, followed by a sequential number. Within each category, schedules have been grouped by subject according to a sequential numbering but without any logical order.
To locate the desired schedule, the user can consult the index or the numerical list of schedules; this is especially useful to get a general sense of the different schedules developed for a particular subject. 2.2 Description of information elements Each schedule contains the following elements: 2.2.1 Retention schedule number Two numbers: first the number representing the category concerned and a sequential number for the schedule within each category. 2.2.2 Identification of record or record series Record title, brief description and use. 2.2.3 Copy type and mediumDescription of type of copy (main or secondary) and record medium. Medium legend:
A: paper
Name of the unit concerned: “unit responsible” for the primary copy, “other units concerned” for secondary copies. 2.2.5 Retention period and notesRetention periods establish the duration and management of a record through its various phases: active, semi-active and inactive. Retention periods of active and semi-active records are generally expressed in numbers of years. The note, used in previous editions, “As long as the record is in active use”, has not been used in this project. We have opted instead for establishing a fixed time period, or have added a number of indications that should enable the active administrative life of any document to be more precisely determined. The inactive period specifies whether the record should be destroyed or retained and the nature of further selection of records to be done at the archives. The recommendation to apply further selection at archives is always accompanied by additional information to facilitate the identification, evaluation and selection of records with historical value. Notes may be added where the retention period cannot be expressed in terms of a number of years or where specifics are required to explain the application of time limits, retention, destruction or archival selection. Retention period and note symbols: X: see note D: destruction R: retention [Editors’ Note - Regarding specific recommendations on retention: where schedules offer a similar option, such as “Retention: 5 years or the duration of warranty, whichever is longer”, the purpose is to ensure a minimum retention period covering the period of warranty. where a schedule refers to a specific number of years in the semi-active column (as in Schedule 2.24) the intent is to recommend a specific minimum for retention of the records. schedules which refer records to the archives for destruction assume that the institutional archives also offers records management services (indeed the presumption of these schedules is a close collaboration if not single service point for both archives and records management services). where a schedule refers to 2 years in the active phase, this may be interpreted to mean 2 years including the fiscal year in which the records are created. However, as the introduction states, particular caution must be used in the application of retention for financial records in particular. where schedules refer to audio-visual and photographic records, note that this may be generalized to other sound and moving image records (again these schedules are general in nature).] 2.3 Using The Quebec Schedules 2.3.1 IndexThe index contains the significant terms used in the retention schedules as well as a number of synonyms. The corresponding schedule number is given with each term. 2.3.2 Using the printed version of The Quebec SchedulesThe printed version begins with a detailed introduction that provides an overview of The Quebec Schedules (the mandate, theoretical framework, development process) as well as information about its contents and use (structure and presentation of retention schedules, description of the information contained in each schedule and procedures for use). There is also a numerical list of all the schedules grouped by category, a detailed table of the three hundred schedules, and an index. 2.3.3 Using the on-line version of The Quebec SchedulesA version of The Quebec Schedules is available on CREPUQ’s Web site ( http://www.crepuq.qc.ca). In addition to presenting all the information available in the printed edition, the site is set up to allow the user to print out schedules individually or by category.__________________________________________________ List Of principal SOURCES consulted: Archives nationales du Québec with the Association de greffiers des cours municipales du Québec (1995). Recueil des délais de conservation à l'intention des cours municipales du Québec. Fédération des commissions scolaires du Québec with the Archives nationales du Québec (1996). Recueil des délais minimaux suggérés pour la conservation des documents des commissions scolaires. Revised 1993 and amended 1996, to comply with the Civil Code of Quebec. GOVERNMENT OF Quebec (2001). Act to establish a legal framework for information technology, L.Q. 2001, c. 32 GOVERNMENT OF Quebec (1983). Archives Act, R.S.Q., c. A-21.1. GOVERNMENT OF Quebec (1985). Regulation respecting retention schedules, transfer, deposit and disposal of public archives. R.S.Q., c. A-21.1, r.1. A. Lapierre Gestion documentaire Enr. (2000). Guide de gestion des documents municipaux. Developed for the members of the Association des directeurs municipaux du Québec (ADMQ) and the Fédération québécoise des municipalités locales et régionales (FQM). Solutions Documentaires GESTAR (1999). Recueil de règles de conservation des documents des établissements de santé et de services sociaux. Developed for the members of the Association des hôpitaux du Québec, the Association des CLSC et des CHSLD du Québec, the Association des centres jeunesses du Québec, the Fédération de la réadaptation en déficience physique du Québec and the Fédération québécoise des centres de réadaptation pour personnes alcooliques et autres toxicomanies. Retention schedules of the following universities:
École de technologie supérieure
[ii]
This
definition draws on language recently used in An Act to Establish a Legal
Framework for Information Technology L.Q. 2001, c.32, which stipulates in
article 3, “Information inscribed on a medium constitutes a document. The
information is delimited and structured, according to the medium used, by
tangible or logical features and is intelligible in the form of words,
sounds or images. The information may be rendered used any type of
writing, including a system of symbols that may be transcribed into words,
sounds or images or another system of symbols. (…)” An Act to Establish a
Legal Framework for Information Technology (L.Q. 2001, c.32).
|
|