Executive Summary

Introduction

The West Virginia Courthouse Facilities Improvement Authority (WVCFIA) and the Records Management and Preservation Board (RMPB) contracted with the Tech Research and Development Corporation (Tech), a non-profit affiliate of West Virginia University Institute of Technology, to conduct a survey and to present findings on the current conditions of records and storage methods, and then to make recommendations that would assist the state in making decisions related to retaining and preserving essential county records using methods that reflect the best practices for modern county records management and preservation. The Tech Research and Development Corporation received this work through an interagency agreement assigned after the competitive bid process for a contract for such work was cancelled. To accomplish this survey Tech subcontracted training and quality control work to two well established and well qualified firms with special knowledge and experience in records management and preservation. These firms are History Associates Incorporated (HAI) in Rockville, Maryland, and Information Manufacturing Corporation (IMC) in Rocket Center, West Virginia. Ms. Nancy Merz, Certified Records Manager, and Ms. Anita Weber, Archivist, are from HAI. Ms. Julie Watkins, Records Specialists, is from IMC. Students majoring in History at Tech and one retired Circuit Clerk were contracted to conduct site visits of the courthouses in all fifty-five counties in the state and to survey county offices in the each courthouse. Within the time and fiscal resources in the agreement, the goal was to determine the quality of the physical environment, the condition of the records, staffing levels as they relate to records matters, the presence of policies and procedures for disasters and records retention and disposition, and the existence of reformatting activities. Survey data was requested regarding records that have been transferred to the control of some other entity such as local historical societies, the state archives, or other repositories.

Methodology

Tech survey team members were dispatched to courthouses between September 16 and November 15, 2002. Follow-up visits were made to selected counties in March 2003. Prior to making the initial visits, students were trained in related records issues on a curriculum developed by the Certified Records Manager and Archivist from HAI. This training included classroom presentations and a visit to the West Virginia State Archives to expose survey team members to the types of records they would encounter at the courthouses. The HAI Archivist and a Records Specialist (IMC) also participated in the early courthouse surveys to conduct onsite training to better assure quality control. The staff of the West Virginia State Archives met with these experts, attended the training at which time they addressed the surveyors, and also conducted surveys in Wirt, Ritchie, Wood, Cabell, Lincoln, Jefferson, and Berkeley Counties and provided the on-site training for a student contractor during the Wood County visit. These staff utilized and helped refine the survey data collection instruments during these visits.

Utilizing the expertise and knowledge of the staff of the West Virginia State Archives, the Records Specialist from IMC, the HAI Certified Records Manager and the Archivist developed two data survey forms (attached as Appendix 1). The first concerned the records themselves and sought to ascertain the physical condition of the materials, including evidence of surface dirt; evidence of damage from insects, vermin, animals, light, water, or fire; the presence of mold or mildew; the presence of red rot or other binding degradation; and the presence of metal fasteners and other binders. The quantity of each type of record held by offices at the courthouse was also sought as was the records' formats, the types and composition of storage units employed, the areas of the buildings in which the records are housed, and the location and condition of off-site storage, if used. The survey team members always attempted to obtain this data through physical inspection of the records.

The second form was designed to survey information from the office holders about staffing levels, training, reformatting activity, electronic records initiatives, and the existence of disaster plans. This form was also used to survey the physical environment of the areas used to store records. Included are sections for recording data samples regarding temperature and humidity conditions, lighting sources, pollutants present, the existence of fire detection and suppression systems, and the types of security systems in place.

To aid in data collection, copies of relevant documentation, such as records’ schedule policies, and procedures in use, were requested from each office surveyed. All submitted documents were reviewed and are available in the raw data collected; however, courthouse personnel submitted relatively few supporting documents. Digital photographs were taken in the survey of storage conditions. A representative sample of active and inactive filing areas, records storage areas, problematic situations such as mold and water damage, and examples of exemplar and problematic shelving and other storage conditions were photographed. Those images deemed by the authors to clarify a point or description in the narrative are included in the final report and matrices. Since areas of concern were, of necessity, the focus of the survey, the images are primarily of crowded, unsafe, or poor storage practices. The surveyors noted that many counties and offices are storing records in well organized and safe storage. These images were not needed for descriptive purpose. A sample survey of active and inactive storage images is included in the submitted information.

The goal was for survey team members to conduct interviews with a sample of office holders or a representative in order obtain answers to many of the questions. The goal was also to conduct physical inspections and to record environmental data from records storage areas wherever feasible. Two difficulties were encountered that prevented complete implementation of this goal. These were time pressures and denial of access. County office holders had time constraints; therefore, the interviewers were not always able to conduct the interviews. There were also times when courthouse personnel did not complete or return survey forms as requested or they completed these in ways resulting in incomplete, confusing, or inconsistently recorded data. For example, rather than give the number of employees, some office personnel indicated “yes” in the staffing category. A telephone survey of a small sample of courthouse personnel indicates that in nearly all instances, there are not clearly defined job responsibilities related to records management. Most often the paraphrased answer to staffing issues related to records was “no one is really assigned—whoever has the time handles records issues.” The project was also reliant on the officeholders’ definition of the condition of the storage areas. Twenty-four individual offices failed to return these survey forms leaving the project with challenges to fill gaps in the data, which could not always be done. Follow up calls and visits in instances of incomplete or missing survey forms generated additional survey data.

While denial of access did not happen frequently, in at least twelve instances team members were prevented from inspecting records storage areas. In fact, the Kanawha County Sheriff refused admittance of the team members, even after attempts to help by a County Commissioner. In McDowell County the Sheriff and Prosecuting Attorney's offices were so suspicious of the team member that they took his identification to check.

There were some areas not surveyed because of concern for human safety. For instance, some areas contained bat feces, and due to its toxicity to humans, survey team members were instructed not to enter such areas. There were some storage areas so crowded as to prevent access by the surveyor, as was the case, for instance for a storage area in McDowell County.

Because there were some instances in which courthouse personnel did not submit survey forms or the forms were incomplete or misinterpreted, because some areas were unsafe for human work or too crowded, and because twelve individual county offices would not allow admittance to their offices, the survey data forms are not complete in some instances. There are, therefore, instances in which specific information from some offices or officers was not available to be included in this survey. It is also of interest to note that, while the engineers were almost always allowed to enter any room requested to examine mechanical or electrical systems, the same level of access was not afforded the records surveyors who asked for entry into the same rooms. This can be explained by the “host” for the entry. Most often the hosts for the engineering survey teams were custodians or building supervisors and most often the hosts for the records survey teams were office holders or their designees. It is of comfort to note that the records hosts were very protective of the records in their charge. Fortunately, this is a survey project as called for in the interagency agreement and not an inventory. While no minimum survey criteria were given in the interagency agreement or by the client for the number or types of offices to be surveyed, the number of records or storage areas to be surveyed, or the minimum percentage survey criteria, the Tech team made every attempt through initial and follow up visits, telephone calls, and letters to cover the state to such a saturation level as to produce a statistically significant survey sample.

The survey teams had as their goal the five major offices of each county. Since no specific offices are delineated in the interagency agreement, they were established through the creation and refinement of the survey instruments as: the offices of the County Clerk, the Circuit Clerk, the Assessor, the Sheriff, and the Prosecuting Attorneys. The request for separate County Commission information was not identified as a need to the survey teams by the client until most of the county visits were completed. Tech is given to believe by the State staff, however, that in most counties these records are kept by another office, thus, these records are incorporated in the survey data, but unfortunately due to the late notice, they do not appear as separate entries except in Wood and Raleigh Counties.

The Tech survey team inspected and collected data from every county and from approximately 420 storage sites at these courthouses and, therefore, believes that sufficient survey data were collected from enough counties, county offices, and county personnel to give substance and reliability to the overall results and recommendations herein given.

Results

Upon completion of the site visits, the team compiled a matrix containing the survey data for each county documenting the conditions found. These matrices are attached as Appendix 2. This is an Executive Summary, therefore, a brief summary of the results by category is below and more survey detail can be found in individual county matrices.

1.1 The Physical Space Housing the Records[1]

1.1.A Temperature and Humidity

Appropriate environmental conditions for records storage are 68 degrees Fahrenheit plus or minus 2 degrees and 45% relative humidity plus or minus 5%. Office and storage area temperatures as high as 88 degrees F and as low as 55 degrees F were recorded during the surveys. Of the 420 spaces used to store records in the courthouses for which data was obtained, only 64 fell in the 66-70 degree F range, 328 facilities failed to meet these conditions with 110 of them having temperatures of 76 degrees or higher and 33 of these above 80 degrees. A mere 22 areas recorded temperatures at or below 65 degrees. Since the same heating and/or cooling systems service both office and storage areas, then the same variance in environments was found in both office areas and storage areas.

Relative humidity levels were recorded as high as 66% and as low as 20% in the offices and storage areas. Of the 393 areas for which data was obtained, 166 fell into the acceptable range, 104 had humidity levels above 50% and 123 had levels below 40%.

It is understandable that office areas will be more likely to have temperatures of 68-72 degrees F. This is the climate most comfortable for people working in them. If these temperatures must be kept at that level, it will not harm the records as long as the humidity can be kept at the low end of the acceptable range. In the inactive storage areas, the temperature and relative humidity should be more closely controlled. If the storage areas are not used as offices, there is less need for the warmer temperatures. Adequate HVAC systems with separate controls for different areas of the building can alleviate these problems. It is also necessary to prevent temperature cycling. Many facilities, in the interest of controlling heating and cooling costs will lower the temperature in the winter and raise it during the summer during those hours when the building is unoccupied. This regular temperature change can damage paper as the cellulose molecules absorb and shed moisture.

1.1.B Windows

The high levels of ultraviolet light in sunlight can damage records. Thus archivists recommend that records not be stored in areas with windows. Not surprisingly, virtually all courthouse offices have windows and few employ coverings that could ameliorate the amount of UV light that enters the offices. Windows were found in 210 of the active storage areas and 115 of the inactive areas.

In offices, drapes, shades, blinds, and the like can be used to block sunlight, however, these are only effective if they are actively used. A passive solution is to outfit windows with UV filtering film. This material, which adheres to windowpanes, can block as much as 99% of UV rays and comes in a variety of light intensities.

Where there is adequate artificial lighting in storage areas, the windows in them can be covered over in a more permanent fashion. If drapes, shades or blinds are not feasible, and structural changes are not acceptable for aesthetic or historic reasons, boards or false walls can be used to block the windows. In those areas where sunlight is the only light available, then UV filtering film is the best solution.

1.1.C Pollutants and other hazards to records

Airborne pollutants, including dust and mold, can damage records through abrasion and fungal growth, which will eat through paper. Insects and animals can also chew through paper destroying records. Water is a hazard in its own right because it can destroy records, but moisture is also a contributing factor in the presence of mold and insects. All of these hazards can be found to one extent or another in the courthouses in the state.

Cigarette smoking and open flames are two other hazards that can damage records. Fire is the most obvious peril, but the smoke itself can also damage records over time. Evidence of smoking and candles in the courthouses was found during the site visits. For example:

§ Cabell County - Lighted candles were noted in the Sheriff's office.

§ Kanawha County - Cigarette butts were found in the boiler room.

§ Mingo County - The Assessor and another employee were smoking while the surveyor conducted his interview. Ashtrays were found in the stairways.

§ Taylor County - The Circuit Clerk's office smelled of cigarette smoke.

Mold

Mold was detected in 120 storage locations in twenty-eight counties that are affected by mold. Most likely the mold is inactive, but once spores are present, warm, moist air is all it takes to create new growth. Braxton and Kanawha counties had storage areas with active molds detected. As recommended in the facilities study, areas of active mold should be investigated by an expert in this field for identification and elimination of the mold.

Moisture, Dampness

Thirty-six counties have some type of moisture problem. For example:

§ Cabell County - Circuit Clerk has a closet prone to flooding, and the Prosecuting Attorney's office showed evidence of water.

§ Calhoun County - Records were found lying in and beside pools of water in a hallway leading to the upstairs storage area. The ceiling in this area continually leaked.

§ Doddridge County - Sheriff's basement and Prosecuting Attorney's windows and ceiling have wet areas.

§ Gilmer County - Assessor’s and Circuit Clerk's basements and Sheriff's jail cell storage area have water on the floor.

§ Jackson County - The vault wall leaks.

§ Kanawha County - The ceiling in the County Clerk's room leaks, and the walls and ceiling in the County Clerk's basement leak. In the County Clerk area labeled Room 6, the surveyor noted that all of the records have been destroyed by a flood.

§ Lewis County - Circuit Clerk garage has wet areas.

§ Mingo County - County Clerk Jail Cell storage area has dampness.

§ Summers County - Dampness on the back wall of the storage room.

§ Upshur County - Assessor's office has a wet corner, and the County Clerk attempts to control its situation with a dehumidifier.

§ Wood County - Circuit Clerk's storage areas have holes in the ceilings. The surveyor noted that the ceiling of the old annex (magistrate) building has holes in it. You can look up and see the sky. When it rains, water flows freely into these rooms.

§ Wyoming County - Boxes of records were found in puddles in the basement.

Animals

Various types of animals could be found in eighty storage areas in twenty-three of the courthouses. Among the creatures noted were bats (10), birds (3), cats (2), mice (33), rats (4), and snakes (2).

Insects

Thirty-six courthouses had insects in fifty-eight storage areas. Among the insects noted were ants (13), bees (6), beetles (1), caterpillars (3), cockroaches (19), dust mites (3), flies (13), gnats (3), lady bugs (9), lice (1), silverfish (3), spiders (23), termites (6), wasps (4), and water bugs (6). While not all of these can damage paper, the presence of any kind of insect raises a flag about general housekeeping matters that can be detrimental to records.

Dust or grime on records

As might be expected most counties have problems with dust and grime thus two hundred areas in forty-five counties are affected by this problem. With records dating back over many decades, this is inevitable.

1.1.D Fire suppression and detection systems

Fire extinguishers

Of the 233 active records areas for which responses were received, 145 are equipped with fire extinguishers. Of the 146 inactive storage areas for which responses were received, 52 are equipped with extinguishers. In addition, the Hampshire County Clerk's office has smoke and heat detectors. The Greenbrier County Assessor stated that, if there were extinguishers anywhere, they were not being checked.

Sprinklers

While seven counties indicated the presence of sprinklers in their facilities, most of the individual offices within these counties responded in the negative. The exception was Harrison County where almost all of the records storage areas were sprinklered. Further research will be needed to verify the accuracy of these results. Of note, when the Pendleton County Courthouse was renovated in 1996, the renovation did not include a sprinkler system.

Those offices that indicated the presence of a sprinkler system are:

§ Barbour County - Circuit Clerk inactive area

§ Braxton County - Assessor's office

§ Grant County - Assessor's inactive area

§ Harrison County - All offices and three of five storage areas

§ Jefferson County - Circuit and County Clerk active areas and County Clerk inactive area

§ Marion County - Circuit Clerk active area

§ Upshur County- Circuit and County Clerks and Sheriff active and inactive areas

Fire and safety issues were a part of the facilities study and a more detailed review is included in the facilities report, which is a part of the overall courthouse study and is included in its entirety on the enclosed CD.

1.1.E Type of security systems in place

Security in most courthouses is concerned with the safety of the people who work in and visit the facilities. Standards set by the West Virginia State Supreme Court were used in this survey. Records security is a different issue. The concerns here are theft and mutilation of the records. There is some overlap in how these types of concerns are met, but in many ways they are different.

Guards at entrance to area

Only eleven offices indicated that there are guards outside individual offices, and only nine storage areas have guards stationed outside. In both of these groups, Circuit Court areas were most likely to be under guard. One of the Circuit Clerks noted that the guard is present only when court is in session.

Locked or limited access to areas with records

Limiting access through locks or other barriers is common throughout the courthouse system. For each of the five types of offices, between 35 and 40 of the courthouses limited access to their active records areas. Inactive records are somewhat less protected, with Circuit Clerks being most likely to lock the areas (40) and Prosecuting Attorneys the least likely (17).

Alarm system

Few offices are protected by alarms. County Clerks are most likely to have an alarm (13), although one clerk noted that his was inoperable, while only half as many Sheriffs (6) and Prosecuting Attorneys (6) are similarly protected. One should also note that many of these alarms may be fire rather than burglar systems, since the respondents did not distinguish between the two.

Secured doors/windows

Secured doors and/or windows are common throughout the courthouses. For the five types of offices, the number with secured barriers ranged between 31 and 43. County Clerks were most likely (43) to have this sort of security while Prosecuting Attorneys (31) were the least likely. There was a greater discrepancy in the inactive areas. While thirty-two County Clerks secured their storage spaces, only 13 Prosecuting Attorneys did so.

Panic Button

The number of offices throughout the entire courthouse system protected by panic buttons ranges between four and ten depending upon the type of office. For instance:

§ Hardy County – Sheriff’s secretary stated that the alarm sounds only in the adjacent room and expressed concern that it wouldn't alert anyone to trouble.

§ Marion County - Assessor has a button that does not work.

Key card access

A total of only seven areas (offices and storage) are secured by key card access systems.

The surveyors included comments on general security matters as well. For instance Harrison, Mingo, and Raleigh counties have guards at the entrance to their courthouses. In Mingo and Raleigh it is also necessary to pass thorough a metal detector prior to entering the facilities. Security cameras were noted outside the Mingo County Circuit Clerk's office and the Ritchie County Assessor's office. A key card is necessary to enter the Brooke County courthouse after hours.

Fire and safety issues were a part of the facilities study and a more detailed review is included in the facilities report, which is a part of the overall courthouse study and is included in its entirety on the enclosed CD.

1.2, 1.4, 1.5 Quantity of Records Held and Condition of Records

Each county matrix contains a survey of the records found during the site visit. Records are listed by office and record type and were to include an assessment of their condition. The goal of surveyors was to collect condition information.

The overall condition of West Virginia's county government records is fair. While current records are well cared for, older ones most often are not. Surveyors singled out just three offices for praise. The Cabell County's Circuit Clerk had a very well organized active records area. There is adequate cabinet space for expansion and compact shelving is also in use. The Marshall County Circuit Clerk main records area is very neat and orderly. A Kompakt movable file is used for storage. This office has room for 12-15 years of growth. Putnam County's Prosecuting Attorney basement storage was clean with boxes neatly stacked on shelves.

The problems identified by the survey range from mold, water damage, and filth, to inaccessibility due to disarray and lack of space in storage areas and dispersal of records throughout the facility. Unless and until space pressures are relieved, these conditions cannot improve.

Below is a sample of the comments made by the surveyors concerning the condition of the records surveyed. More comments are found in the individual county matrices.

§ Barbour County - Circuit Clerk has microfilm for 1960-1983 records that is unreadable.

§ Braxton County - County Clerk jail storage contains dockets with an open water pipe protruding through them. These volumes are covered with mold and falling apart.

§ Calhoun County - The ceiling storage room contains cardboard boxes and open files spread out over concrete steps

§ Fayette County - Prosecuting Attorney’s office has a leaking furnace in its basement.

Part of the basement is used for storage of useless items. Offices are in the process of converting to "electronic storing."

§ Gilmer County - Boxes are scattered everywhere in the basement making it impossible to move through the area to inventory it.

§ Greenbrier County - County Clerk has microfilm but does not where the film is or what the volume is.

§ Hampshire County - Assessor stored most of his current information on the computer and filed according to West Virginia Tax Department regulations. The office maintains one file cabinet drawer with permanent records.

§ Hancock County -- Assessor purged his records and moved all old ones (assessments, personal property, land transfer, etc.) to a storage facility in Weirton. A list exists but was not provided.

§ Hardy County - Attic records very dirty and torn. There was no order to this space.

§ Jackson County- Inactive records are stored in an old ambulance garage. All offices indicated concern that their records were disintegrating in the poor environment. Fertilizer is stored alongside records. Basement storage is a filthy, unorganized mess.

§ Kanawha County- County Clerk stored records in an area where mold is rampant. The walls have a large hole that leads under the courthouse. Another area is described as filthy and littered with cockroach carcasses.

§ Lincoln County - Garage is used for storage. Boxes and volumes are stacked with access to many blocked. There are places where records have tumbled over and are in disarray. When shelving is used, it is wooden. There is a broken window (with records stored adjacent to it and showing weather damage from the exposure), concrete floor, lawn mowers and weed whackers stored in same area (after gas tank filled, surveyor noted a pervasive aroma of gasoline) These records are regularly used by the staff. Holiday decorations, ballot boxes, video slot machines confiscated by state police, computers, and other equipment are all stored in the garage as well.

§ Logan County - Records stored in the jail were covered with dirt and stored on the floor in six-foot high stacks.

§ Marshall County - County Clerk deeds have been microfilmed and are stored with Iron Mountain in Pennsylvania. As was found in several counties, large books have been reformatted to a smaller size that fits two volumes in one.

§ McDowell County - Space is extremely limited in the lower vault or dungeon as it is called. Twelve crowded rolling shelves fill the room except for a narrow walking space. This unit contains records damaged with red rot as well as useless whatnots taking up space. The Records room is also pressed for space. Books have to be stored on top of the metal shelves. Some volumes no longer have covers. The area is also quite dusty.

In the upper vault there is no space. There was not even enough room to walk around.

Although the Courthouse is on elevated ground and appears safe from flooding, the material in the basement appears to have been damaged by something other than age or improper storage. The wooden shelves on which the records are stored are in desperate need of replacement. The only light in the room came from the windows--there were no lights to be turned on.

On the third floor, there are several banker boxes throughout the room stacked to the ceiling in a very disorganized fashion. There is one area of the room that shows signs the roof has been leaking and records are stored directly beneath.

Circuit Clerk also said that they had some old Hatfield-McCoy records but they do not know where they are now.

§ Mingo County - Keys to storage areas seem in short supply. No key to the jail cell storage was available the day of the survey.

§ Nicholas County - Records in the Circuit Clerk storage area are in poor condition. Mice, bats, and grime are in evidence. Boxes are stacked high enough to obscure windows. Duct tape is used to replace missing spines. Jail storage also contains exercise equipment.

§ Ohio County - Circuit Clerk has a dirt basement and houses bicycles, marked as evidence, as well as records.

§ Randolph County - Deeds are all microfilmed, but the film cannot be used because there is no microfilm reader.

§ Summers County - The upstairs storage space which holds older inactive records was disorganized with stacks of books all over the place and loose files on the floor. The records were mixed with Christmas decorations and other various supplies and storage for the court house. The County Commissioner said that the reason it was like this is because of a lack of space in the courthouse and there are not enough employees to take time off their jobs to put the books in order. The Prosecuting Attorney has to keep large banker boxes in his office. Boxes are scattered around the room. The reason given was there is no more room for the records, and these need to be kept for they are fairly new.

§ Wetzel County - Attic not suitable for storage, but it is the only space available. The records in this area are not organized and dust and mold are present. They said that they did not have enough people to spare to organize it.

§ Wood County - Uncovered insulation lines the walls in the annex. There are holes in the ceiling through which the sky is visible. Water comes in whenever it rains. The attic storage area is running out of space.

§ Wyoming County - The Assessor's basement has boxes in puddles, bare electrical wires overhead, grime, and silverfish. In the jail storage area, many books are covered in plastic. The Circuit Clerk's active records room had evidence lying around including a rifle. Records from this office are scattered all over the building. County Clerk microfilm had a strong vinegar odor.

1.6 Disaster Plan

While no one ever wants disasters to occur, they are a fact of life. It is known that planning in advance for floods, fires, power outages, and the like can limit the extent of the damage. The courthouse survey determined that virtually none of the offices had developed a written plan for protecting records in such situations either for removal of threatened records or prioritization of records to be protected. Forty-nine counties are without a plan for any of their offices. Eight offices (Cabell Circuit and County Clerks, and Sheriff; Fayette County Sheriff; Marshall, McDowell, and Putnam County County Clerks; and the Upshur County Prosecuting Attorney) indicated that they had disaster plans, and although copies of these plans were requested, none were provided for this survey. No written plans for recovery of damaged records, including prioritization of records to be recovered, exist in the counties either.

Furthermore, little has been done to alleviate or remove known threats to records. Such actions would include relocation of records from areas prone to flooding or similar dangers, relocation of threats to records such as water pipes, and repair of leaking roofs, windows, and walls. For a sense of the situations found, the counties below are listed. With the exception of one office in each of the four counties listed below, all the offices indicated they had done nothing to safeguard their materials.

§ Barbour County - Circuit Clerk moved everything out of the flood plain.

§ Berkeley County - County Clerk keeps back up records in Morgantown and Salt Lake City.

§ Jackson County - Sheriff covers records with tarps when it floods.

§ Jefferson County - Circuit Clerk stores all records on CDs and keeps copies of the CDs both on and off-site, as well as retaining hard copies.

1.7 Staffing

The survey was to obtain information about the number of employees in each office who have records responsibilities. Survey team members had to rely solely on the information received from the office holders and courthouse personnel. From responses received, it appears that for many offices the entire staff was provided instead. In particular, the sheriffs’ offices figures on records management seem higher than should be expected and this may be because they include all members of law enforcement rather than just those charged with records management. This may also be due to each officer being charged with retrieving and replacing records for his own use. In the larger offices there may be employees solely responsible for records matters, but we found no office that stated such. In those offices with fewer than five employees, it is likely that all are involved in working with records. Follow-up calls support the theory that no personnel are specifically designated as “Records Personnel” and that records are handled by many staff members and on a time available basis. Without written job descriptions that contain areas of responsibility specifically related to records management and without supervisors and office holders being able to distinguish which staff and their specific duties, it is not possible to determine the number of staff related to records management. This survey, therefore, found the need and recommends that written job descriptions be created where they currently do not exist and that existing written job descriptions be revised to clearly identify staff duties and responsibilities and minimum qualifications for the records duties assigned. Until these are available, it will not be possible to determine whether offices need more staff for records or to better utilize the staff they have. Provided below are the numbers given to the Tech survey team.

1.7.A Number of Employees by Type of Office

	Assessor	Circuit Clerk	County Clerk	Sheriff	Prosecuting Attorney
Full-time
# of responses	44	40	37	38	34
High	76	33	34	52	49
Low	1	1	2	3	1
Bulk	4-12	1-8	2-13	3-10	1-6