Optical Imaging Versus Paper Records Storage

Abstract
Optically imaged, virtual storage of records is a viable alternative to physical storage and retention of college records.

In these times of decreasing resources, most organizations are being asked to do more with less. The Virginia Community College System (VCCS) is no exception. Storage of records and data in the form of paper is becoming increasingly more expensive and ineffective.

Paper records storage occupies significant amounts of floor space. Blue Ridge Community College (BRCC), a college that serves over 8,000 students each year, has over two hundred linear feet of student records files in the Admissions and Records (A&R) office alone. These files are stored in filing cabinet drawers, in boxes being prepared for filing, and in separate piles, awaiting preparation for filing. Space used by these records is a critical college asset and could be used for other needs.

In addition, significant clerical time is spent filing, retrieving and then re-filing documents and student files. A large portion of BRCC’s six A&R employees’ time is spent on this task. For comparison, the International Records Management Trust (1995) has made some interesting estimates:

Weiss(1994) provides some additional insight into the costs to locate documents:

Using this data, the records in A&R alone cost Blue Ridge Community College $20,000 per year to maintain, not including document retrieval costs or costs associated with searching for mis-filed documents. One can only imagine the annual cost at a large institution like Northern Virginia Community College.

Additional problems with paper storage of records occurs when more than one college employee needs to access a file simultaneously. It is impossible for two people to physically access the same paper file at the same time. This often results in the use of inefficient or ineffective substitute processes in an attempt to provide services. An employee may rely on incomplete online data, make assumptions, simply not obtain the data, or make decisions based on incomplete data.

Furthermore, physical back-ups of paper files do not exist. A catastrophic loss of paper records would have a detrimental effect on the college’s ability to continue to perform its mission. As with all records kept in paper form, the potential for loss of paper records is significant. Paper is highly flammable and is also easily damaged by water during water pipe breaks, floods, or fire fighting actions. Only a portion of records may be reconstructed from online data. Having the originator again provide the documents is the only way that some documents could be replaced.

Unauthorized personnel can gain access to records. Records sent between offices are accessible by mailroom personnel. Also, records are often left unsecured overnight as they are being prepared or filing, accessible by security and custodial personnel.

Finally, clerical time to purge records in anticipation of destroying or archiving dated records is often delayed. The retention of these additional records further aggravates storage space and record mis-filing problems.

There is a better way that gives instant access to records, anytime, anyplace, by anyone approved to access those records: this is through the use of document imaging technology.

Once scanned and stored on an optical disc, documents can be retrieved for viewing, copying, and electronic transmittal to others. Because the retrieval process makes a copy of the data rather than extracting the data, no re-filing of documents is required. Also, once scanned and indexed, no document can ever be lost.

There is a diversity of formats that could occur in transcripts and other related documents. Therefore, records would be indexed under an identification number unique to the individual, such as social security or student ID number. The individual document within each record is then further indexed according to the type of record (college applications, state residency status requests, grade transcripts, payroll time sheets, purchase orders, vendor invoices, etc.). Documents are accessible over the local area network (LAN) and may be viewed, copied, or transmitted. Duyshart (1997) estimates that using digital imaging with compression, the equivalent of all documents in a four- drawer filing cabinet, or 10,000 text documents, can be stored on a 600 Mb CD-ROM disc. He also estimates that the more advanced Digital Versatile Disc (DVD) is capable of storing between 4.7Gb and 17Gb of data.

In order to allow for the destruction of the original documents immediately after copying, it is necessary that a method of storage be selected that does not lend itself to accessing a file, making alterations, and then re-storing the file. To ensure this, the "Write Once Read Many" (WORM) optical storage medium is recommended instead of the "Re-writable" storage medium. Worm optical discs hold the same amount of data, use the same writing devices to record data, and are currently available for the same price as "Re-writable" disks.

Current Hewlett Packard manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP) for a 5.2 Gb optical disc, is $125 in both rewritable and WORM formats.

An electronic document storage and retrieval process would provide a number of benefits:

More Efficient Use of Personnel
Labor-intensive tasks of filing, extracting for queries, and re-filing student record folders are eliminated. Personnel time is also a valuable resource that can be used more productively to improve services provided.

More Efficient Utilization of Floor Space
Storage space required by a large number of physical records is "virtually" eliminated. Space in a public institution is a valuable commodity that can be put to a number of better uses than to store records that are accessed infrequently. A single CD WORM disc can hold the equivalent of a four-drawer file cabinet of records.

Error Reduction
With this system, human errors in transcribing information from one document to another (data entry errors) are completely eliminated. An electronic file of the record can be simply added to communications with others and forwarded.

Williams (1994) advises that there is a very solid legal foundation for the admissibility in evidence of optically stored records: "With only a few possible exceptions, the necessary evidentiary laws are in place. Further, the key points of these laws have been tested and favorably decided upon in court cases."

The Commonwealth of Virginia has adopted the Uniform Photographic Copies of Business and Public Records as Evidence Act (UPA). This language is included in the Code of Virginia in § 8.01-391 (1994).

Figuring Optical Storage Capacity
In order to estimate storage needs, start with the relationship discussed earlier, that 10,000 documents or a four-drawer filing cabinet of documents could fit onto a 600-Mb disc. Using this relationship, 100 file drawers of paper documents, when scanned and compressed, would fit on about twenty-five 600 MB optical WORM discs or on about three of the higher storage capacity 5.2 Gb optical discs. There is a situation related to the features on some documents such as transcripts or checks that that can cause an increase in the amount of storage space needed. In order to allow for this feature, a simple doubling of the calculated three 5.2 Gb optical disc storage capacity for this volume of records is recommended.

DVD or CD "jukeboxes" holding eight discs are available on the market that will meet a variety of storage capacity needs.

Server Requirements
The system server should be significantly fast and fault tolerant. Optional add-on features such as a redundant power supply, while causing the price of an already expensive workstation to increase rapidly, will be required to avoid service interruptions during critical periods. This server may also serve as the print server during workgroup printer directed print jobs.

Software Requirements
There are a reasonable number of imaging software vendors available. The software selected must be capable of providing adequate indexing of the documents for subsequent access. Also, the software should support an LA/multiple simultaneous user configuration. Other features such as image compression and OCR should be available from the vendor.

View / Workstations
The current VCCS minimum standard is a Pentium 133 MHz at the desktop. Therefore, existing standard PCs will provide sufficient capacity to view, print, and transmit documents, without the need to upgrade or purchase new, higher units.

Printer Requirements
Personal printers are attached to many VCCS desktop PCs. Also, most VCCS desktop PCs are connected to a LAN. However, few of these have the "horsepower" to provide service for the printing of grayscale stored transcripts. If not already in place, it is recommended that each building using this technology have access to at least one larger capacity, networked, workgroup printer. This will be adequate to provide for the print needs of black and white stored documents.

Personnel Costs
Personnel who currently perform document filing should provide sufficient resource to perform the scanning of the documents into the system. Once a document is scanned and stored, there is never a need to handle this document again. When the need to pull folders for queries and to re-file documents is eliminated, additional clerical time is saved, allowing provision of support in other areas.

Many of the elements required to support such a system are already in place. VCCS system standards provide the required LAN, viewing/workstation PCs, and printers. Existing personnel levels should suffice to perform system related document maintenance.

A range of mid-sized system hardware and software costs is available and is summarized below. Products were selected that provide a mid-range level of service at the lowest cost. Costs are manufacturers’ suggested retail prices (list prices) obtained from vendors’ web home pages. Costs are intended only to provide a general idea of implementation costs. In fact, if the cost trend of PCs is an indication of technology costs in general, future costs of this equipment will continue to spiral downward.

System Element	Cost
Optical Storage Device (Sony OSL-2500/25)	$ 9,200
Scanner (Fujitsu 3097)	4,000
Print/File Server (IBM Netfinity 5500/M10)	18,000
Software (Cardiff Teleform Elite)	5,750
Total	$ 37,000

The current availability of low cost document imaging and optical storage devices makes this technology a viable, cost effective way of improving service while improving the effectiveness of scarce college resources.

For any college desiring to install this technology, it is recommended that the selection of the software to be used is the first step in the process. A business process reengineering should then be performed. Next, system implementation should be limited initially to the installation of a system prototype. This can be accomplished by purchasing lower volume scanning and optical storage devices. Not only will a prototype provide for the testing of the operability of the system but, if it is successful, it will allow for the spreading of system costs over a longer period. The final step would be the purchase and installation of remaining hardware items.

It is recommended that the VCCS Technology Council take a lead in the implementation of this technology. The council could reduce the amount of resources spent system-wide on implementation. By prototyping the system and recommending certain software packages, they could avoid this step being performed by twenty-three different colleges.

The maintenance and storage of paper documents has many inherent weaknesses, including hidden costs and attached risks. These weaknesses are magnified by today’s ever increasing student populations and growing document retention requirements. Document imaging is a viable, up-to-date technology that could eliminate many of these costs and risks.

Berndt, V. L. (1998, April). Reality check - Lessons learned after implementing an electronic imaging system. Records Management Quarterly. n2, p. 3(6).

Case, Carl J., (1993, July). Imaging technologies: A strategic organizational solution. Journal of Systems Management. v44 n7, pp. 12-17.

Duyshart, B. (1997). The digital document: A reference for architects, engineers and design professionals. Oxford: Architectural Press.

Hunton, J.E. (1994, November). Setting up a paperless office. Journal of Accountancy. pp. 77 – 85.

Hurwicz, M. (1995, August). The paperless office. Network Computing. Issue 60.

Johnson, I.R. & Jenson, R.L. (1997, Summer). Implementing document imaging in an accounting environment: A case study and analysis. The Government Accountants Journal. 46,2, pp. 32-37.

Mccoy, D. (1998). Document imaging-office:Key issues for 1998. Gartner Group. Document # K-03-7619.

Mccoy, D. (1998). Document imaging’s paradoxical year. Gartner Group. Document # SPA-03-4046.

Meagher, R. (1997). Survey of document imaging systems in local governments. Prarie Village, Kansas: ARMA International. National Computer Systems (1995). College & University Images. 1,1, pp. 1-2.

Silver, B. (1998, September). Industry trend reports: Documentum embraces imaging. Aptos, Ca, Bruce Silver Associates.

Sutton, M. (1996). Document management for the enterprise: Principles, techniques and applications. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Walsh, T. (1998, February). State CIOs stem paper flood with data warehouses. GCN State & Local.

Weiss, M.J. (1994, November). The paperless office, Journal of Accountancy. pp. 73-76.

Williams, R.F. (1994). Legality of optical storage: Admissibility in evidence of optically stored records. Chicago, Cohasset Associates.

Robert S. Baldygo is the Dean of Financial and Administrative Services at BRCC. He is currently enrolled in a program of study at Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. This article is adapted from a research paper completed in connection with that program of study.

Optical Imaging Versus Paper Records Storage

By Robert Baldygo