A document should have been retained for a second review if it was likely to be needed for administrative reasons, or had potential historical or research value. Read more about A document should have been retained for a second review if it was likely to be needed for administrative reasons, or had potential historical or research value.
The 1994 guide stated that at the first review stage, documents might be destroyed 2 years from the date of the last document if they have no further administrative value at all, or until any time between 2 - 15 years from the date of the last document if they only have a short to medium term continuing administrative need. Read more about The 1994 guide stated that at the first review stage, documents might be destroyed 2 years from the date of the last document if they have no further administrative value at all, or until any time between 2 - 15 years from the date of the last document if they only have a short to medium term continuing administrative need.
The 1994 guide outlined the procedure for how the "Branch Review Decision box" was to be used by the person reviewing the file with a view whether to destroy it, retain it for a short period or for a long period. Read more about The 1994 guide outlined the procedure for how the "Branch Review Decision box" was to be used by the person reviewing the file with a view whether to destroy it, retain it for a short period or for a long period.
The 1994 guide stated that files should be reviewed two years after the date of the last action, but that some branches did not have sufficient storage space to hold files for that long. Read more about The 1994 guide stated that files should be reviewed two years after the date of the last action, but that some branches did not have sufficient storage space to hold files for that long.
The 1994 guide mandated that an index slip or file docket also had to be completed and had to be stored separately from the file. Read more about The 1994 guide mandated that an index slip or file docket also had to be completed and had to be stored separately from the file.
The 1994 guide contained guidance on completing the front cover of the file, which included ticking a box labelled "Branch Review Decision box" before the file was dispatched to the DRO. Read more about The 1994 guide contained guidance on completing the front cover of the file, which included ticking a box labelled "Branch Review Decision box" before the file was dispatched to the DRO.
In 1994, the Department of Health's record management guidance became "For the Record", and contained a short leaflet for staff and longer guidance for records managers and reviewing officers ("the 1994 guide"). Read more about In 1994, the Department of Health's record management guidance became "For the Record", and contained a short leaflet for staff and longer guidance for records managers and reviewing officers ("the 1994 guide").
When the Department of Health had to give evidence to the BSE Inquiry they realised that there had been shortcomings in their system of handling private office papers. They took some action in response. Read more about When the Department of Health had to give evidence to the BSE Inquiry they realised that there had been shortcomings in their system of handling private office papers. They took some action in response.
During the BSE Inquiry, a number of former ministers who gave evidence were critical about the fact that documents they had reviewed and written on had not been preserved. Read more about During the BSE Inquiry, a number of former ministers who gave evidence were critical about the fact that documents they had reviewed and written on had not been preserved.
The Shepherd Review led to the DRO working with private office staff in the Department of Health to set up a registered filing system. Read more about The Shepherd Review led to the DRO working with private office staff in the Department of Health to set up a registered filing system.