Ohio Historical Records Advisory Board Meeting
Minutes, October 31,2008
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Laidlaw, Jelain Chubb, Janet Carleton, Judy Cetina, Dan Noonan, John Runion, Jill Tatem, Nikki Taylor, Roger Verny, Galen Wilson, Amy Johnson Crow, Marjorie McLellan
BOARD MEMBERS NOT PRESENT: Laurie Gemmill, Bernie Quilter
OHS STAFF PRESENT: Rachel Tooker, Todd Kleismit, Jim Strider, Pari Swift, Patty Davis
GUEST: Kathleen Williams – Executive Director, NHPRC
1. Welcome
Jelain Chubb called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m., noting that Bill Laidlaw was detained by press interviews but would be joining the meeting later. She introduced Kathleen Williams, Executive Director of the National Historic Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC), and thanked her for attending the meeting. Board members introduced themselves.
2. Approval of July 17, 2008 Meeting Minutest
Marjorie McLellan moved to approve the minutes. Dan Noonan seconded the motion. The minutes were approved.
3. NHPRC Update
Williams spoke about the importance of State Historical Records Advisory Boards (SHRABs).
In order to assist SHRABs in their duties, the NHPRC awards State and National Archival Partnership (SNAP) Grants, formerly known as administrative grants, specifically to state boards. Boards may apply for a SNAP grant every 18 months. Grants are capped at $20,000 (base) to support basic board and statewide needs, as long as the board is active and working to prepare or implement a strategic plan. In addition to the $20,000 base, states can apply for another $50,000 in competitive grants. The additional funds can be used for projects such as statewide assessments or regrants. The NHPRC awarded over a million dollars to states this year. The next SNAP grant application deadline is March 6, 2009. Chubb stated that OHRAB will submit an application against the deadline.
Chubb asked Williams to speak to the importance of a strategic plan. Williams stated that the best plan is one a board can implement in an organized manner, based on prior work. To the NHPRC, a strategic plan is an acknowledgement of an active board, which is a requirement for a SNAP grant.
Chubb asked what the NHPRC looks for from grant reviews. Williams stated that the SHRAB serves as peer reviewers of submitted grants. Board summaries, scores and comments carry a great deal of weight in the NHPRC evaluations. While it is not mandatory, the NHPRC staff strongly recommends that prospective applicants seek board input on project proposals before submitting a formal application. Williams noted that it is also important that each SHRAB knows what grants repositories in its state are applying for in order to give the board insight into future planning.
4. Review of Strategic Plan Activities
In order to accommodate scheduling conflicts 4b was moved ahead of 4a.
4b. NHPRC Grant Application Reviews
Williams left to tour the recently installed exhibit “Rockwell’s America” on the OHS museum floor while the board considered two NHPRC grant applications.
Chubb asked if there were any general questions about the grant review process. Chubb reminded the board members that changes can be made to their individual reviews after the grants are discussed, as long as they note the original and revised score and what issues influenced their change of mind. Final reviews are needed by November 21. Chubb stated she would consolidate summaries and scores and submit them to NHPRC by the December 19 deadline. Applicants will receive the board summary, but not the members’ individual reviews. Chubb reminded the board that the discussion is confidential. The board discussed the merits of two proposed projects, one from Ohio University and one from Wright State University.
Following the discussion, Chubb reiterated the November 21 deadline for members to submit their final comments, scores and recommendations for full support, partial support, rejection, or resubmission of the grant with modifications. It was noted that if a grant is rejected, it could be refined for future submission.
Williams rejoined the board members.
4a. Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) Connecting to Collections Planning Grant
The State Library of Ohio (SLO) and the Ohio Historical Society (OHS) have jointly submitted an application for an IMLS Connecting to Collections Planning Grant to conduct a statewide assessment of historical, museum and library collections across the state. Roger Verny gave background information on the grant. The maximum grant award is $40,000, however partnerships could be leveraged to gain additional funding. If the grant is awarded, the results could be an opportunity for a larger implementation grant, though only two are awarded per cycle, making it extremely competitive. Williams stated that the assessment tool is the key to being awarded implementation grants.
Verny noted that if awarded, the IMLS grant will tie into the OHRAB SNAP grant, since the board would be involved in its implementation. OHRAB would act as an advisory committee bringing together different organizations and starting dialog. OHRAB members would also promote the grant in their communities and institutions by letting them know it is coming and encouraging them to participate in the needs assessment, summits and regional meetings.
4c(i). Local Records Task Force
Judy Cetina, task force chair, informed board that the task force had decided to be a local government records task force because local records was too broad a focus for now. The task force’s mission is to produce a document to convince legislators of the records related problems throughout the state. The task force presented an outline of their executive summary to the board to make sure they are headed in the right direction and also sought to determine its specific role in identifying and promoting strategies.
Todd Kleismit summarized recent meetings with County Commissioners’ Association of Ohio (CCAO). The CCAO assembled a meeting of county-level stakeholders to discuss the feasibility of sustainable funding for local government records programs. Attendees seemed receptive to considering the pros and cons of implementing a fee fund, however there may be political barriers. The Ohio Clerk of Courts Association may be more amenable to adding an additional amount to the fees they are already asking to increase, but only for court records. Chubb suggested that OHRAB could make an impact by sending a letter and executive summary of all issues to the Clerk of Courts’ and Governor’s offices. The letter should be no more than one or two pages. The target date for a draft is December 1. The draft letter and executive summary will be reviewed and discussed at the January board meeting. State Archives staff will work with Clerks of Courts to flesh out details of a proposed program and approach.
4c(ii). Strategic Planning Task Force
Verny stated that the new strategic plan needs to be adopted prior to the March 2009 SNAP grant submission. The plan will guide OHRAB’s priorities, discussions, activities and budget expenditures over the next three years. The board will be able to implement the strategic plan with SNAP grant funds.
The draft plan was discussed and members were asked to vote on what they felt should be OHRAB’s top priorities for the 18 month period of the SNAP grant. Chubb noted that if the board is interested in creating a regrant program similar to those in other states, ironing out the administrative process should be a priority action during the first 18-month SNAP grant. The board supported this initiative. Jill Tatem supported expanding OHRAB’s participation in history day. It was agreed that Megan Wood, State Coordinator, National History Day in Ohio, be invited to attend the January board meeting.
Chubb stated that the task force will update the plan to reflect the members’ input and the items that received the highest votes. Members will receive the new draft with the next meeting packet and the board will vote on the plan at the January meeting.
4d(i). Preserving the American Historical Record (PAHR) Act
Chubb reported that, as expected, the Act will not get through Congress before it recesses. The good news is that it attracted 25 co-sponsors between May 14 and mid August. The Act will be reintroduced as soon as Congress reconvenes. At that time, members of the Senate will be approached for support. Chubb stated that she would be calling on the board to make contacts again and go on district meetings in early 2009.
4d(ii). State Archives and Records Management
Laidlaw stated that he and Chubb are scheduled to talk to Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner in November regarding records management within her office. The hope is that she will be an advocate for better records management across state government.
Marjorie McLellan asked what happened to the $300,000 in funds for State Archives that was gained through advocacy efforts last year. Laidlaw stated that it stayed in the archives and was used to fill 3 of 4 positions. The budget recessions occurred before the Electronic Records Archivist position could be filled. Currently, OHS is delaying filling any positions.
4d(iii). Archives Month
Concern was expressed over how late the Ohio Archives Month poster was in arriving this month. Chubb stated that the poster is a product of the Society of Ohio Archivists (SOA). She also noted that though OHRAB had contributed funding for the poster over the past two years, SOA did not seek OHRAB support for the 2008 poster. The Advocacy Committee will consider how OHRAB, as part of the strategic plan, can best take part in the 2009 Archives Month. Funding should be included in the SNAP grant application.
4e. Ohio Electronic Records Committee (OERC)
John Runion stated that the last meeting was canceled and rescheduled for November 13.
4f. Appointments and requirements of OHRAB
Chubb stated that Laurie Gemmill’s position still needs to be filled and asked members to suggest possible candidates from local historical societies. The five members with expiring terms were asked to consider reappointment. The application materials were distributed and members were asked to submit completed forms to Chubb as soon as possible.
Chubb also asked that members complete the required ethics training as soon as practical.
5. OHRAB Meeting dates and sites for 2009
Members submitted their calendars with preferences for OHRAB meeting dates and sites in 2009. Staff will determine the consensus for meeting dates.
Laidlaw called for other business. Runion motioned to adjourn the meeting, McLellan seconded. The board adjourned at 3:02 PM.
