As I said, just because the data is stored electronically doesn’t mean it’s a “record.” Think of electronic data collectively as all of the handwritten or typed information on all of the pieces of paper in all of the file folders, hanging file folders, drawers, and filecabinets in an office. Think of a record as one sheet of paper in a file folder. The handwritten data on one sheet of paper is already assembled together.
Now lets say someone asks for information that would require you to gather information written on multiple pieces of paper in different files and drawers. Just because it’s stored in your filecabinets doesn’t mean it’s on one piece of paper (a record) or even in the same file folder or drawer (a table.) So while you may have papers segregated in logical order in file folders and drawers and can easily go get one record or one group of records, you can’t easily assemble bits and pieces of information from different pieces of paper in multiple file folders in multiple drawers. You could but why do so if it isn’t part of the natural order of your filing system?
A record is assembled data that is stored all together in one nice little package like a piece of paper. Records can be segregated like papers in a file folder. If electronic data is not a record that means it’s all spread out in multiple locations and has to be assembled and gathered in order to access and view it.
The language of UIPA:
“”Government record” means information maintained by an agency in written, auditory, visual, electronic, or other physical form.”
From page 13 of the UIPA Manual:
“An agency should make the information available in the form
requested if it is readily retrievable in that form. An agency is not required to prepare a compilation or summary of its records unless it is readily able to do so.”
As you said, the HDOH could easily print out a 1961 birth index. According to the UIPA Manual that means they are required to do so, since they are “readily able to do so”.
Would the 1960-64 birth index be readily retrievable in electronic form?
Another issue regarding how they come up with the 1960-64 birth index. You said they would query all records with a birth date of 1960-64. But if - as they told me - the computerized index book is the current form of the handwritten 1961 index, then what it should contain is the births that were ACCEPTED by the state registrar in those years. The date reference should be the date the record was given a number by the HDOH - not the date of birth. Is there a way a person could tell what query was made that resulted in the printout itself?
I’ll ask you both this, since you both so kindly offered. =)
The “For Office Use” portion of the request for a birth certificate lists different indices where the office worker is apparently is supposed to check off once they’ve checked that index. COHB, DBC, Pending, etc. When the P&E researcher was at the HDOH and asked about different indices - also including the index of foreign births, which existed in 1981 and was required to be kept permanently - they were told those indices didn’t exist.
How would that data likely be stored in a database? How would they keep the records separate in the database for the different categories of legal status? How would they likely flag amended or late BC’s? What index would those show up in?
Could a record be added today for a birth in 1961? Are there protections to keep manipulation from being possible?
Can reports be printed that would include several categories? For instance, could a report be printed that had just the 1960 and 1963 births? If such a report was printed, would there be anything on the report itself which would say what the query results were that were actually printed?
Would the whole database be likely to take queries by string variables - so you could query anybody with a last name starting with Ob, or could query anybody having the first name of Barack? Could you query anybody who was a Jr or Sr?
How might multiple records under a single certificate number be noted or kept straight - as, for instance, after an adoption when the original BC is sealed? Could two different names have the same BC#? If there was an adoption and the BC with the original name was sealed, do you think that original name would still show up on the index list?