In September 2011, the White House launched an online petition web site, We the People, where anyone can post an idea asking the Obama administration to take action on a range of issues, get signatures, and get a response from their government. You can learn more about the effort and add your name to the petition by going to https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/!/petition/start-national-effort-digitize-all-public-government-info/15vthgVB

You can also visit the Archivist of the United States David Ferriero’s blog to learn how such an initiative might impact the National Archives.

A group called “Yes We Scan” (https://yeswescan.org) is leading the petition drive to have the federal government analyze the cost effectiveness of digitizing holdings from the National Archives, Library of Congress, Smithsonian Institution, and scores of other federal agencies. “Yes We Scan” is an effort by the Center for American Progress and Publicresource.org to promote digitization of all government information in an effort to make it more accessible to the world.

To date, thinking about digitization has been piecemeal. Individual agencies have initiated their own projects or thought about the problem in terms of prototypes and pilots. Only the White House can bring these efforts together under one roof and begin to think in terms of a national digitization strategy for our federal government. While funding to undertake such an ambitious goal in the near future is admittedly not available, an analysis could provide the basic scope of what it would take to start the process.

“Yes We Scan” is asking the Obama administration to convene governmental and non-governmental experts, perhaps in the form of a Presidential Commission, Interagency Task Force, or other mechanism. Under the proposal, the “Federal Scanning Commission” would be tasked to answer 6 questions and deliver a report within a year:

1. What are the holdings of our national institutions? How many images, documents, videos, and other objects are there?

2. How long would it take to digitize these materials?

3. How much would it cost given current technology? Is there directed research or are there economies of scale that would bring those costs down?

4. What is the strategy for digital preservation of these materials? How will we avoid digital obsolescence?

5. What is the strategy for identifying restrictions on use of the material? How does one identify and safeguard materials that have copyright restrictions, contain personally identifiable information, or contain classified materials?

6. What are the economic and non-economic benefits of such an effort?

• What are the cost savings to government?
• What are the economic benefits? Would this effort enable industries that build on top of scientific and technical information, spur innovation in the legal marketplace, or enable our creative industries to create more effectively?
• What are the non-economic benefits? Will such an effort lead to better STEM and other educational efforts? Will it promote a more informed citizenry and better access to justice?

If you support this effort, please add your name to the on-line petition no later than January 20, 2012!

The $915 billion spending bill (H.R.2055, H. Rept. 112-331) encompasses nine of the twelve annual appropriations bills. Three other FY 12 appropriations bills have already been enacted.

The omnibus spending bill and conference report embodies the funding compromises that were worked out between House and Senate appropriators over the past few weeks. The House has passed the bill and Senate is expected to approve the omnibus spending bill shortly. So these can be considered the final FY 12 funding numbers, pending passage of the bill by Congress and President Obama’s signature.

Below is a summary of the bill and conference report. The FY 11 funding level and the President’s FY 12 budget request are provided for comparison.

U.S. Department of Education

Teaching American History Grants

The Senate has agreed with the House to eliminate funding for the Teaching American Grants program.

Earlier this year, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved a Fiscal Year Labor, HHS and Education 2012 funding bill that included $46 million for the Teaching American History (TAH) grants program, the same level as last year. However a House Appropriations Committee version of the bill eliminated funding for TAH.

In May, the House Education and Workforce Committee passed H.R. 1891, the “Setting New Priorities in Education Act, which would eliminate 43 programs at the Department of Education including Teaching American History (TAH) grants.

The National Coalition for History and our constituent organization engaged in a major advocacy campaign urging House and Senate appropriators to adopt the Senate level of $46 million for Teaching American History Grants in FY 12.

Teaching American History Grants:
• FY 12 Omnibus: $0
• FY 11: $46 million
• President’s FY 12 Budget Request: $0; History education funding would have been consolidated into a “Well Rounded” Education fund that does not yet exist in law.

Title VI–Fulbright Hays Programs

The U.S. Department of Education’s International Education and Foreign Language Studies (IEFLS) programs, including HEA-Title VI and Fulbright-Hays programs, form the vital infrastructure of the federal government’s investment in the international service pipeline.

The Fulbright-Hays programs are of particular importance to historians because of the resources they provide for research and education relating to foreign languages and cultures.

Fulbright-Hays:
• FY 12 Omnibus: $7.465 million
• FY 11: $7.465 million
• President’s FY 12 Budget Request: $15.5 million

Title VI-C, Institute for International Public Policy:
• FY 12 Omnibus: $0
• FY 11: $1.5 million
• President’s FY 12 Budget Request: $1.9 million

Higher Education Act, Title VI-A&B (Domestic Programs)
• FY 12 Omnibus: $66.7 million
• FY 11: $66.7 million
• President’s FY 12 Budget Request: $108.3 million

IEFLS Total:
• FY 12 Omnibus: $74.1 million
• FY 11: $75.7 million
• President’s FY 12 request: $125.8 million

National Historical Publications & Records Commission (NHPRC)

The National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC) would receive $5 million under the omnibus appropriations bill. The House Appropriations Committee had proposed cutting funding for the NHPRC to $1 million. The National Coalition for History, the Association for Documentary Editing, the Society for American Archivists, and Council of State Archivists lobbied hard for the adoption of the $5 million figure. So despite the $2 million cut from FY 11, this can be considered a victory.

NHPRC Total:
• FY 12 Omnibus: $5 million
• FY 11: $7 million
• President’s FY 12 Budget Request: $5 million

National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)

The National Archives would see its overall funding cut from $416.8 million to $376.5 million, or a reduction of $40.3 million.

Reflected in that cut is the elimination of $71.8 million in dedicated FY 11 funding for the Electronic Records Archive project. The ERA is no longer considered a research and development project since it became operational earlier this year. That eliminated the need for separate funding. ERA’s operation and maintenance costs are now included as a part of NARA’s base funding level. NARA’s Operating Expenses budget shows a $34.2 million increase.

NARA Operating Expenses
• FY 12 Omnibus: $ 373.3 million
• FY 11: $339 million
• President’s FY 12 Budget Request: $403.7 million

National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH)

The National Endowment for the Humanities would receive $146.3 million in FY ’12 under the omnibus appropriations bill. This is an $8.7 million cut from FY 11, but is the same amount requested by the President for FY 12. Programmatic level details are provided below.

National Endowment for the Humanities:
• FY 12 Omnibus: $146.3 million
• FY 11: $155 million
• President’s FY 12 Budget Request: $146.3 million

FY 12 Omnibus–NEH Funding by Program FY 12 vs. FY 11 enacted (in parentheses)
$3.5 million – Bridging Cultures ($1.5 million)
$40.5 million – Federal/State partnership (42.4 million)
$15.2 million – Preservation and access ($16.5 million)
$13.4 million – Public programs ($15 million)
$14.5 million – Research programs ($16.2 Million)
$13.2 million – Education programs ($13.7 million)
$500,000 – Program development ($500,000)
$3 million – We The People Initiative grants ($3.3 million)
$4.1 million – Digital Humanities Initiatives ($4 million)
$108 million – Subtotal Grants Funds——($113.1 million)

$2.3 million – Treasury funds ($4.8 million)
$8.3 million – Challenge grants ($9.4 million)
$10.6 million – Subtotal Matching Grants—-($14.2 million)

$27.5 million – Administration ($27.2 million)

$146.2 million – NEH TOTAL ($154.6 million)

Institute of Museum and Library Services:

The Institute of Museum and Library Services would see its budget cut $5 million in FY 12 under the omnibus bill, down to a level of $232.3 million.

• FY ’12 Omnibus: $232.3 million
• FY 11: $237.3 million
• President’s FY 12 request $242.6 million

Library Programs
• FY 12 Omnibus: $184.8
• FY 11: $189 million
• President’s FY 12 request: $193.2 million

Museum Programs
• FY 12 Omnibus: $30.9 million
• FY 11: $30.1 million
• President’s FY 12 request: $32.3 million

National Park Service (Historic Preservation Programs)

• FY ’12 Omnibus: $56 million
• FY 11: $54.3 million
• President FY 12: request $61 million

State historic preservation offices would receive $47 million, up from $46.7 million in FY 11 and tribal grants would increase from $7.9 million to $9 million.

The Heritage Partnership Programs would receive level funding of $17.4 million

Smithsonian Institution

• FY ’12 Omnibus: $811.5million; includes $75 million for construction of the National Museum of African American History & Culture.
• FY 11: $759 million
• President FY 12 request $861.5 million

This funding will support a wide variety of projects, including research fellowships and awards for scholars, the preservation of humanities collections at smaller institutions, traveling exhibitions, and humanities initiatives at historically black colleges, institutions with high Hispanic enrollment, and tribal colleges and universities. The grants awarded will also support training for museum and archive staff to preserve and enhance access to their collections, while NEH Challenge Grants provide support for long-term humanities activities.

As part of the agency’s Bridging Cultures initiative — which encourages projects that explore the ways in which cultures from around the globe, as well as the myriad subcultures within America’s borders, have influenced American society— NEH announced awards in three special grant programs: Bridging Cultures Through Film, Bridging Cultures at Community Colleges, and Bridging Cultures Implementation Grants for Public Programs. Projects receiving funding through these programs include the production of a film on the experiences of the Cambodian actor Haing Ngor during the Cambodian genocide and his life in America afterwards, a two-year professional and curriculum development project for faculty and administrators from eighteen community colleges to improve introductory humanities courses at two-year institutions, and the implementation of library programming and a companion website on the poetry of the Muslim world.

Also among the grants announced are a research fellowship to examine reading habits in the antebellum South and their relationship to slavery and an emerging market economy, and a challenge grant to provide tuition-free introductory college level courses in American history, literature, and writing to low income students in Massachusetts. Funding will also support workshops for cultural heritage conservators on preventative conservation methods and the conservation of digital prints, and provide climate monitoring equipment to protect a collection of 1,000 artifacts documenting the lives of Chinese immigrants in Lewiston, Idaho, in the late 19th century.

This award cycle, institutions and independent scholars in 43 states and the District of Columbia will receive NEH support. Complete state-by-state listings of grants are available here (45-page PDF).

Presidential Records
The bill amends the Presidential Records Act to require the Archivist of the United States, upon determining to make available any presidential record not previously made available publicly, to:

• (1) Provide written notice of such determination to the former President during whose term of office the record was created and to the incumbent President, and (2) Make the notice available to the public.
• Requires a presidential record to be made available to the public 60 days after the Archivist gives notice, unless the Archivist receives notification from a former or incumbent President of a claim of constitutionally based privilege against disclosure. The incumbent President has the authority to decide whether to uphold the former President’s invocation of executive privilege.
• Prohibits the Archivist from making a record that is subject to a privilege claim asserted by the incumbent President publicly available unless:
  (1) The incumbent President (on behalf of themselves or the former President) withdraws the claim; or (2) the Archivist is otherwise directed to do so by a final court order that is not subject to appeal.
• Prohibits the Archivist from making available any original presidential records to anyone claiming access to them as a designated representative of a President or former President if that individual has been convicted of a crime relating to the review, removal, or destruction of the Archives’ records.

Federal Records Management
The manager’s amendment also included provisions giving the National Archives increased ability to streamline the records preservation process and improve the oversight of records management by federal agencies. The bill as amended:

• Encourages agencies to turn over records to NARA “as soon as practicable, but no later than 30 years after the records were created or received by the agency.
• Allows NARA to accept for deposit the records of the Congress, the Architect of the Capitol, or the Supreme Court, in addition to those of federal agencies.
• Directs the Archivist to promulgate regulations within 18 months of enactment of the bill requiring all Federal agencies to transfer all digital or electronic records to NARA in digital form “to the greatest extent possible.” The regulations must include timelines for Federal agencies to comply “as soon as practicable,” but no later than four years after enactment. Agencies must submit a report to the Archivist a report on the agency’s progress with compliance.
• Directs the Archivist to annually certify whether the records management controls established by the incumbent President for the preservation of his or her records are being met.

The Committee also adopted an amendment offered by Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., that would prohibit the president, vice president and any employee in the Executive Office of the President or the Office of the Vice President from using any unofficial electronic mail or systems of communication for official businesses.

Floor action on the bill has not been scheduled and no comparable legislation has been introduced in the Senate.

The new OGIS Access System (OAS) will manage the requests for assistance that FOIA requesters and agencies bring to OGIS. This tool will both streamline OGIS’s work and increase transparency of its operations.

More than 1,200 FOIA requesters from 48 states and 13 foreign countries turned to OGIS for assistance in its first two years as FOIA Ombudsman. The service that OGIS provides ranges from checking the status of delayed FOIA requests to facilitating resolutions of disputes involving complex database requests. While OGIS has successfully resolved hundreds of cases, the Office recognizes the need for greater collaboration with agencies and a more systematic way of collecting information about its work. The OAS – which is supported by and integrated into a re-launched and expanded OGIS website – will help the Office achieve these goals.

“OGIS was created to resolve disputes between FOIA requesters and federal agencies,” said OGIS Director Miriam Nisbet. “As we began our work, we realized that we needed an increased web presence to both manage our cases and educate requesters about the FOIA process. Our new OGIS Access System will help us achieve these goals.”

OAS is among the first generation of federal government online services operating in “the cloud.” This approach allows OGIS to launch a number of scalable online services, including:

• A searchable library of FOIA terms and concepts;
• An online submission process for those requesting OGIS’s assistance;
• The ability to review the status of a case with OGIS and communicate directly with OGIS staff; and
• The capability to engage with the public on ways to improve FOIA, which also is within the OGIS mission.

“The National Archives and Records Administration strongly supports this memorandum from the President, which sends a very clear message to Federal agencies about the importance of managing electronic records. Records management must keep up with the technologies used to create records in the Federal government, and the President’s Memorandum underlines the critical nature of this responsibility. I am delighted that this is a priority of this Administration, and appreciate that the President reiterated what the National Archives has long noted: “good records management is the backbone of open government,” said Archivist of the United States David S. Ferriero.

The memorandum requires each agency to report to the Archivist the name of a senior agency official who will supervise an agency-wide evaluation of its records management programs. These evaluations, which are to be completed in 120 days, are to focus on electronic records, including email and social media, as well as those programs that may be deploying or developing cloud-based services.

After the senior agency officials have been named, the National Archives will schedule meetings to provide additional information on completing the requirements in the memorandum.

Once the evaluations have been submitted, the National Archives and the Office of Management and Budget will have an additional 120 days to issue a Records Management Directive to agencies that will provide specific steps to reform records management policies and practices.

For additional information on-line on the requirements laid out in the President’s Memorandum go to the National Archives National Records Management Program Blog, Records Express

Researchers will be able to search the 1940 Census using the public computers at National Archives facilities nationwide, or personal computers with Internet access. In addition, for customers with large data requirements, the National Archives Trust Fund is selling the 1940 Census data on hard-drives and hard-drive arrays. Microfilm copies of the 1940 Census data will be available for purchase from the Trust Fund, as well.

The National Archives Trust Fund will accept pre-orders for the 1940 Census data on hard-drives and hard-drive arrays. Digital copies will be available for purchase as a whole or by individual state.

Pre-orders for the entire 1940 Census and/or for individual states will be sent via overnight mail on April 2, 2012.

If you would prefer the data on microfilm, orders for 1940 Census microfilm can be placed on April 2, 2012.

To place an order or for more information, see the Trust Fund product page[http://estore.archives.gov/Category/105_1/1940_Census.aspx].

For researchers interested in the learning more about the 1940 Census see www.archives.gov/research/census/1940 or e-mail questions to 1940Census@nara.gov.

On November 4, 2011, as required by this Executive Order, the National Archives Controlled Unclassified Information Office established a publically available registry reflecting the initial categories and subcategories of unclassified information that require dissemination or safeguarding controls consistent with and pursuant to law, regulation, and Government-wide policy. This registry, additional information and CUI training is online at www.archives.gov/cui/.

The CUI program will be implemented in phases based on compliance plans and target dates to be submitted by executive agencies and departments. When fully implemented, the CUI program will require executive departments and agencies to exclusively use these categories for controlling and marking such unclassified information. The National Archives will consult with the agencies and the Office of Management and Budget and then set implementation deadlines for CUI, to include for applying standardized CUI markings.

Currently, there are more than 100 different policies for such information across the Executive branch. This plethora of policies has created inefficiency and confusion, leading to a patchwork system that fails to adequately safeguard information requiring protection, and unnecessarily restricts information sharing by creating needless impediments.

Established in 2008, the National Archives Controlled Unclassified Information Office is responsible for overseeing and managing the implementation of the CUI framework. This office furthers the President’s goal of Open Government, while at the same time outlining standards to protect some information pursuant to and consistent with applicable law, regulations, and government-wide policies.

The grants were made from the National Park Service’s American Battlefield Protection Program (ABPP) to help states and local communities acquire and preserve threatened Civil War battlefield land outside the boundaries of National Park units. Priority was given to battlefields listed in the National Park Service’s Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields (CWSAC Report). Funds were awarded based on the property’s location within CWSAC-defined core and/or study areas, the threat to the battlefield land to be acquired, and the availability of required non-Federal matching funds.

The grant funds were made available under the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-10), which appropriated $8,982,000 for the Civil War battlefield land acquisition grants program. Applications for the balance of the funds are accepted at any time. Criteria to consider in the applying for the Civil War Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants include:

The LWCF Civil War Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants are awarded through a competitive process to units of state and local governments.

• Private non-profit groups may apply in partnership with state or local government sponsors;
• Each grant requires a dollar-for-dollar non-Federal match.
• Grants are available for the fee simple acquisition of land, or for the acquisition of permanent, protective interests in land at Civil War battlefields listed in the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission’s (CWSAC) 1993 Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields.
• Higher consideration will be given to proposals for acquisition of endangered lands at battlefields defined as Priority I or II sites in the CWSAC report.

Complete guidelines for grant eligibility and application forms are available online at: www.nps.gov/history/hps/abpp

For further information, contact Kristen McMasters, Grants Manager, at 202-354-2037 or kristen_mcmasters@nps.gov

Grantee, State and Amount Awarded:

• Adams County, Pa. Gettysburg Battlefield, Bievenour Tract (Fee Simple)
  $135,000
• Adams County, Pa. Gettysburg Battlefield, Nguyen Tract (Fee Simple)
  $82,000
• Missouri Department of Natural Resources Wilson’s Creek, Keet Tract (Fee Simple)
  $400,000
• North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, N.C. Bentonville Battlefield, Griffis Tract (Fee Simple)
  $41,000
• North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, N.C. Bentonville Battlefield, Jackson Heirs Tract (Fee Simple)
  $73,000
• Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Va. Cedar Creek Battlefield, Abel Tract (Fee Simple)
  $430,000
• Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Va. Chancellorsville Battlefield, Partain Tract (Fee Simple)
  $246,425

Total = $1,407,425

These online records include photographs, maps, textual records, posters, patent drawings, and video and sound recordings that reflect the 2012 theme and can be incorporated into any of the five National History Day categories.

Teachers can introduce the 2012 National History Day theme with an activity that encourages students to define the terms revolution and reform, and then examine the differences between them by analyzing documents connected to the New Deal. Another activity, entitled Mrs. Jackson’s Letter, illustrates an emotional reaction to ‘Bloody Sunday’ in Selma, Alabama in 1964. In other activities, students can reflect on why some documents are more effective than others when creating a National History Day project.

Using the site’s seven interactive tools, teachers also have the option of creating, modifying, and sharing additional activities connected to the 2012 National History Day theme based upon the students’ skill level.