healthcare Archives - Page 4 of 4

Articles Tagged with: healthcare

August 18, 2022

Understanding Digitization Regulations

So far in this series, we’ve discussed the general nature of a records management program and the ways that your records and metadata have to be maintained. This installment will be about the rules surrounding digitization.

Much of the information in this post was drawn from the Canadian General Standards Board (CGSB) document Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence. Sections from that document are referenced here using its numbering scheme; any other references are linked directly. This blog series is not intended to serve as official legal counsel, but rather, to complement it by providing additional context and explanation for the concepts laid out in the CGSB’s guide.

Why/When should I digitize my records?

As we’ve discussed in previous posts, digital information systems have numerous advantages over physical documents, including remote access, incredible storage efficiency, better security, and easier redundancy. There are also significant risks in sticking with physical documents when digital options are available, like permanent damage, insecurity, and incompatibility with your own or partners’ information systems. All of these factors mean that holding onto physical documents when you don’t need to is holding your organization back from greater efficiency and security, and exposing it to unnecessary risk. If you can digitize a file, it’s best to digitize it as soon as possible.

Furthermore, CRA record retention policy requires you to keep important business documents like official correspondence and records of transactions for many years, often long after they’re still relevant to your current goals. The storage efficiency of digital technology, in both cost and space, makes deciding to keep these necessary archives in physical form another unnecessary cost; especially when most organizations already have the digital infrastructure to accommodate these files.

But what about legal reliability?

It’s a common misconception that physical documents are more legally reliable than digital files. While this may have been true in the past, innovations in digital systems have made it possible for digital files to far surpass the reliability of physical documents. Digital metadata systems make it possible for every interaction with a record to be automatically recorded, and protected file formats like PDF-A make it nearly impossible to tamper with documents. On the other hand, a physical document can be undetectably edited and replaced or read without authorization. Of course, a document is not just more legally reliable because it is digital; you’ve got to use the right accountability tools to make your digital files more reliable than paper.

But what about signatures? Many regulations around document authenticity require “wet” signatures, which just means physical documents with ink signatures. The Canadian General Standards Board (CGSB) makes specific mention of signatures and indicates that digital images of signed documents are legally equivalent, so long as all of the requirements for proper digitization have been followed. Specifically:

“Where there is a requirement to maintain records with wet signatures (i.e. signatures made on the physical document using physical means) to provide evidence of approval, authorization, acknowledgement, verification, notarization or the witnessing of an act, such requirement can be satisfied by digitizing the record and maintaining a digital image of it, provided that all of the conditions set out for the digitization of paper records have been met.” (5.5.2)

So then, what are the requirements that must be met for the digitization of a file to be counted as “proper?” What makes a digital version valid, and why?

What are the minimum requirements for digitization?

The short answer, is quality, non-redundancy, transparency, documentation, systematic policies, and quality control.

Quality

In a perfect world, where your organization has a limitless budget, infinite access to cutting-edge technology, and all the time in the world, you’d want digital copies of your documents to be as close to perfect as possible. In the real world, however, this will not always be possible. Some amount of information or image quality will be lost in the transformation into digital. The good news is that with modern imaging technology, nearly perfect scans are not difficult to achieve.

The regulations specifically just require that the digital versions of your documents be “…sufficiently high-quality…substitutes of analogue records…[to] serve ongoing business needs as well as unanticipated future requirements,” (6.4.2.2).

In other words, the digital copies just have to be functionally identical, not necessarily perfect. This means that the minimum image quality required will vary based on the purpose and contents of a record. A text-only document won’t require as good image quality as a printed image, for example.

Whatever the physical record contains, the principle benchmark for sufficiency is that the digital copy contains all of the information from the original.

Non-Redundancy

Redundancy isn’t normally an issue for digital files, as any file stored on at least two hard drives is already duplicated, and the time and monetary cost of creating more are negligible. However, the CGSB guide specifically forbids the re-digitization of “born-digital” records. “Born-digital” records are any files or documents originally created in a digital format.

Even though the process of creating a digital record, printing it off, and sending it to someone else for digitization is obviously inefficient, it does happen. If your organization received or imported a born-digital record from another party in physical format, the physical file may be the only version in your possession. If this is ever the case, regulations require that you attempt to get the original digital file from the original party, before trying to get it digitized.

Not only is it less efficient to digitize a print-out of a once-digital file, but it’s also detrimental to the image quality, and is thus doubly unnecessary: unnecessary cost, and unnecessary information loss.

Quality-Control Procedures

The quality-control procedures required by regulation are extensive, but when digitizing hundreds or thousands of records at a time, it is essential that nothing is lost, so having redundant quality controls is important.

Specifically, you are required to double-check the records at “…the document preparation stage, at scanning and indexing, and at the bulk upload stage,” (6.4.2.2). So that means that, before scanning, you have to make sure that the physical documents are both readable and properly prepared for the scanning process.

During scanning, you must check that the process is working properly and that the digital copies created are sufficiently high quality.

After the scanning process, you need to check each digital copy before it is uploaded to the final storage location.

If you find that any file is of insufficient quality at any stage in this process, for any reason, it has to be noted, and re-digitized.

Transparency & Documentation

Consistent with the other prescriptions discussed in this series, everything having to do with your digitization process needs to be transparent, and thoroughly documented. The regulations around digitization require your Records Management manual to contain comprehensive, updated, and accurate explanations of all of your policies, requirements, and approved digitization procedures.

Not only do your standing policies and approved procedures need to be documented, but the actual process does as well, including which documents were digitized, for what reason, when, and by whom. You also need to record the “legal and business rationales for authorized destruction of any source records,” (6.4.2.2) So every time you approve the destruction of physical documents for any reason, including that they have been appropriately digitized, it must be documented, along with the reason.

Furthermore, both the requirements imposed on you by the regulations and your own records management policies need to be imposed on any third-party vendors doing the digitizing for you. This includes the requirement to document the proceedings, including who digitized a file, how, and when. All of this information must be available to you from the vendor, and they must be required to follow all of the same rules as you would if you were to do the job in-house.

By the end of the digitization process, the following must be true:

The digital versions are complete and accurate copies, which are just as capable of serving as evidence as the original physical documents.
Every step of the digitization process was documented, including what happened to the original source documents.
The source and digital records are organized and available to everyone with the appropriate clearance; including the relevant authorities.

High-Quality Digitization Solutions with Consentia

Consentia has been providing high-quality transformation solutions for over 50 years, including document imaging, data entry, transcription, and microfilm/microfiche scanning. We refuse to take any risks with the safety and security of your information. That’s why our service bureau is secured behind two locked doors, and only staffed by trusted and vetted individuals. Security personnel are on-site 24 hours a day, and all visitors are always supervised by staff for the entirety of their visit.

We are fully equipped to handle simple and complex projects and can scale our operation to handle high volumes or urgent deadlines. Our in-house I.T. team and experienced scanning professionals mean we have the expertise and technical flexibility to tailor solutions to suit your specific needs. Contact us today to find out how we can help you bring your physical documents into the digital world.

July 1, 2022

Microfilm: Should you (still) be using it? Part 2

In the previous post, we went over some of the vulnerabilities of microfilm; both physical vulnerability and its vulnerability as an information system. In this part, we’ll cover the ways that you can protect your microfilm from decay if you decide to keep it. We’ll also compare it to digital in case you’re thinking about converting your film into digital files.

Part 2 – How to Prevent Microfilm Decay

Environmental Controls: Comprehensive environmental control, including temperature, humidity, light, and air quality, are essential for preventing most forms of damage and decay.
1. Temperature: should be kept between 0 C and 18 C; the lower, the better.
2. Humidity: should be kept as low as possible; below 50% at least, ideally below 25%.
3. Air Quality: should be filtered and regularly assessed for airborne pollutants that will damage the film.
4. Light: light should be kept to a minimum, and the film should never get any direct sunlight.
Handling Precautions: Anytime you use a film for reference, you risk damaging it or accelerating its decay.
1. Don’t: ideally, you should never handle a film after it’s been moved to long-term storage. No matter how strict or comprehensive your precautions are, there is no way to totally eliminate the risk of starting a decay process in a film. Any kind of handling should be minimized as much as possible
2. Working Copies: a film which is likely to be used for reference more than a few times a century should have working copies and preservation copies so that damage/decay caused by handling can be limited.
3. Temperature: before handling a film, the temperature in the storage room should be increased gradually up to comfortable temperatures so that no condensation develops
4. PPE, but not for you: oils on your skin and moisture from your breath or sweat can affect your films whenever you’re handling them, so it’s best to wear a mask and gloves.
Other storage precautions:
1. Curate Room Materials: ensure none of the materials in the room are corrosive or acidic in any way. This includes the paint on the walls and cabinets and the material that the cabinets and storage boxes are made out of.
  - Cabinets & Boxes: should be made out of metal or high-quality plastic, not wood or cardboard. Wood products tend to release small amounts of acid and moisture into the air over their life spans.
  - Paint: If the walls in your storage room are painted, ensure that it’s at least three months old, as this is the amount of time it takes for even dry paint to stop releasing pollutant chemicals into the air.
2. Store Individually: due to the risk of contagious deterioration, like acetate decay, it’s best to isolate each reel or batch of fiche into its own airtight container. This way, decay or damage in any one item can’t spread to the others surrounding it.
3. Do Not Stack: Though the reels and plastic sheets may seem physically resilient and sturdy, they should not be stored in any way which puts excess weight on them, like stacking on the same shelf. In long-term storage, the lightweight of other reels above them has enough time to warp and disfigure films at the bottom of a stack.
4. Check Regularly: Despite minimal handling being ideal, the subtle and insidious ways in which film deteriorates means that storing your films and forgetting about them until you need them is not an option. Regular check-ups for acidity, air quality, and other risks are necessary to catch deterioration problems early.
  - If your organization is able to afford ideal environmental controls (i.e. nearly 0% humidity, refrigerator temperatures, high-quality air filters, airtight individual packaging, etc.), deterioration is less likely to start and will progress more slowly if it does. You won’t need to check on them as often.
  - If your organization cannot afford ideal environmental and storage conditions, you’ll need to check up on the films more often. Lower temperatures and humidity levels make problems like mould and oxidization less likely, but they can still develop in non-ideal conditions.

Recall the claim made by microform enthusiasts that it can last for 500 years. Though the (relative) recency of their invention prevents us from having evidence of any films lasting this long, it may turn out to be true. But given the recommended storage precautions, the only way this 500-year mark seems achievable would be to lock your films away in a dark, airtight refrigerator underground, rarely checked at all and only handled by meticulous, masked and gloved film experts, and never used. If your organization is a well-funded national archive, then that probably doesn’t sound too bad. If you’re almost anyone else, these kinds of precautions probably just aren’t practical.

So then, why would anyone ever use film?

Paper has a proven, not theoretical, shelf life of nearly 2000 years when well maintained, and digital is far more compact and efficient. If the main advantages of microfilm are compact information storage and longevity, aren’t these advantages completely surpassed by a combination of paper and digital?

The answer is that microfilm strikes a balance between reliability, storage efficiency, and longevity, which makes it perfect for archival purposes.

Even a poorly managed film library will last a few decades, which is much longer than digital’s 2-5 year maximum on unplugged digital storage. A well-maintained library may or may not actually last the full 500 years, but there are archives with films created in the 19th century still in good condition, eons compared to digital.

Storage efficiency. Even though digital is more compact than both of them, microfilm really is a lot more compact than paper. In a previous post, we illustrated the efficiency of digital by comparing a single terabyte hard drive, which can store 83 million pages of text, to the size of the stack that much paper would create. If we do the same thought experiment with a microfilm reel, and we pick a high-capacity variety (i.e. 215’ long, dual channel), it can contain over 10,000 images. That’s nothing compared to digital’s 83,000,000 in a terabyte, but 10,000 sheets of paper (if 0.1mm thick) is still a 1-meter tall stack that’s being compressed to a space roughly the size of a hard drive. Multiply that storage ratio across the millions of documents stored by archives and libraries, and you’re saving an enormous amount of space by using film instead of paper.

Rare duplication. Every time you duplicate a file there’s a chance of losing information to corruption, whether that’s an imperfection on a filming table or a photocopier or a bad digital read. Even if a film library needs to be refilmed every 30 years (which is a short time compared to a well-maintained library), that’s still many fewer chances for a bad copy than digital.

Legal reliability. Film is often considered more legally reliable than digital, which also makes it more valuable for archives. Digital information is more and more reliable every year as the technology for copying files continues to improve, but file corruption does still happen. It’s also much easier to secretly tamper with a digital record than a film record, which gives law courts a reasonable skepticism with digital records admitted as evidence. However, built-in metadata systems are improving many courts’ opinions on digital records.

Unlikely target for theft. One of the main disadvantages of film is its inaccessibility; it can take a long time to navigate a physical library of reels to find the exact record you’re looking for, and then scroll through a reel hundreds of feet long until you find the specific document you’re looking for.

The silver lining of this disadvantage, however, is that information thieves are much less likely to target a film archive. Compared to digital information theft, which can be done instantly and remotely if you’ve got the technical aptitude, stealing information from a film archive would involve breaking into a secure facility, spending hours searching through the directory and scrolling the film, and then getting back out before law enforcement can surround the facility.

So then should you (still) be using microfilm?

That depends on a number of factors, but in general, probably not. The key function of microfilms, the need which they meet better than any available alternatives, is the reliable, compact, long-term storage of large volumes of legally sensitive documents. Archives and libraries tend to still use microfilm because they have enormous volumes of information in their collections, and much of it is often legally significant or confidential. These files also don’t need to be referenced often and need to be as reliable and authentic as possible.

For almost any other organization, microfilm is just not a cost-effective information system. The value it offers is hyper-secure, mass storage of important files that don’t need to be accessed very often. For any business or organization active in the ever-shifting modern economy, an important file that you don’t have rapid access to is a potential risk. Digital alternatives like isolated servers might not be quite as secure as a microfilm vault, but that level of security is well beyond most organizations’ needs and comes with the cost of very slow access times, often multiple hours, sometimes days.

Should you digitize your microfilm?

Almost certainly. Again, unless you’re an archive, you probably want to have rapid access to any file important enough to keep secure. That’s not something microfilm can offer. Beyond that, digital files are far easier to duplicate, making the longevity of a microfilm reel over a hard-drive something of a moot point. A hard drive can last more than a decade, and the information on it can be transferred to a new drive so quickly that the cost in both money and time is negligible.

Digitizing your films has the potential to backfire if it’s not done properly, however. Anytime you take your films out of storage, you risk beginning or accelerating some form of decay, so digitizing once takes time off their shelf-life. If all the information is converted over perfectly, then this isn’t a problem; but if anything needs to get redone, it will accelerate the decay of those files even further. Additionally, any time files of any kind are handled, there’s a small chance of more conventional damage like ripping, tearing, bending, or water damage; so it’s important to make sure your files are well taken care of.

Consentia has been working with microfilm files for decades, and our film specialists know how delicate and important your files are. For secure, reliable, high-quality digitization services, choose Consentia.

June 24, 2022

Microfilm: Should you (still) be using it? – Part 1

First developed in the 19th century, microfilm technologies (a.k.a “microforms”) store tiny, accurate images that can be scaled up to a readable size with only a light and some magnification. A microfilm reel can store thousands of images in a small space. Thinner, more accessible sheets of microfiche hold 80 images in a space smaller than half a page of paper. These options allow for very compact information storage compared to full paper documents, and as a result, they came into widespread use throughout the 20th century, especially in libraries and archives.

Today though, microforms are commonly considered relics from a bygone era; before the days of digital computers and the internet. New microfilms are exceedingly rare, most date back to the late 1990s or before, usually long-term records stowed away in libraries and archives. Once digital information systems became widely available, the once-revolutionary technology very quickly fell into obscurity and disuse. Despite having many advantages over paper, microfilm could not hope to keep up with digital’s efficiency, speed, and flexibility; and computers have only become more powerful and available since then.

Part 1 – Understanding Microfilm Decay

One of the primary advantages commonly credited to microforms is their longevity. Authors, archives, and microform companies have pointed out that, theoretically, microfilms should last as long as 500 years, so long as they’re stored “properly.” That may sound pretty straightforward; if something is important enough to include in a record, it’s probably not something you want to risk losing by improper care.

It’s worth noting, however, that microfilms haven’t been around long enough to confirm that projection, and yet many microform libraries have already deteriorated, some of them only a few decades old. These impressive, theoretical claims aren’t necessarily inaccurate, but they do implicitly obscure the two primary drawbacks of microforms: they’re delicate and hard to replace.

Delicacy – Decay

At first glance, microfilms do not appear exceptionally delicate. Even after a decade in storage, a microfilm reel can still survive being dropped or shaken, and boxes of reels, probably don’t require “FRAGILE” labels (unless, of course, they are very old). By “delicate,” then, we mean that longevity anywhere close to 500 years requires expensive and precise environmental controls, meticulous care, and consistent handling protocols. They’re not exceptionally delicate in the here and now, but living up to the claim is a delicate and difficult process.

Microfilms degrade in a number of ways, including (but not limited to) Acetate Decay, Redox, and Embrittlement. Following proper storage protocols and precautions can prevent all of these from happening to your films, but as you’ll see, such preventative measures are very complex, and often more expensive than other alternatives. Every individual aspect contributing to that complexity is another way for mistakes to be made that could compromise your films.

Types of Film Decay: Causes & Solutions

Problem 1 – Acetate Decay (a.k.a “Vinegar Syndrome”)

When the acetate compounds in your film start to decay, they turn into acetic acid, which gives off a distinctive vinegar smell. Not only is the breakdown of the acetate compounds a form of damage in and of itself, the product of that decay, acetic acid, then goes on to continuously damage the other components of the film. The results can include delamination, anti-halation colour distortions, plasticizer exudation, shrinkage, and fading dye (if your film is in color).

According to Craig Saper, a professor of Language, Literacy, and Culture at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County writing for The Atlantic, back when microfilms were more ubiquitous, Vinegar Syndrome was so common that “…librarians and researchers sometimes joked about salad being made in the periodical rooms.”

Cause – Airborne Contaminants

Exposure to pollutants and moisture in the air causes the acetate compounds to break down, producing acetic acid. The reaction isn’t instantaneous, of course, but without strict air quality and humidity controls, every time a film is outside of an airtight container there’s a chance it will begin or accelerate the acetate decay.

Additionally, the fumes released by the acetic acid as it eats away at one film can spread through the air to kick off the same reaction in another film sitting next to it. If there are any leaks in your air-tight containers, this contagious problem could potentially spread from one film to an entire collection.

Solution – Re-filming or Digitizing

Acetate decay isn’t inevitable, but it is irreversible, and once it sets in your film has only a short time before it’s completely unusable. Any information not saved by creating new copies will be lost forever as the film begins to curl and the images decay.

Creating film copies of documents for the first time is time-consuming and expensive. Creating duplicates of older films is a little easier since you won’t have to process all of the original paper documents, just the condensed reel form; thus, duplicating damaged films should be cheaper than creating new ones.

However, you are still physically creating a new film, so duplicating isn’t as simple or as cheap as it might sound. You also have to ensure that the new film has minimal exposure to the old film during the duplication process, or else the fumes released by the acetic acid could start the process all over again in your new copies.

Alternatively, you could decide to digitize these decaying files, turning them into PDFs or images instead. Processing a large number of film reels or fiche sheets can be time-consuming and expensive, but there’s no risk of further film decay with the end product, and it has the added benefit of making all that information compatible with digital information systems, and thus, with the rest of the world’s systems.

Problem 2 – Redox

Silver is a common component in the chemical soup used to create microfilm, and when it’s exposed to moisture in the air, it tends to oxidize, turning into red or orange splotches on the film. These patches can obscure important information on the microimages and once it’s set in they can’t all be removed.

Solution – Kodak Brown Toner

Unlike Vinegar Syndrome, refilming might not be the best solution. Once the silver spots have developed, the fact that they’re opaque means that any copy images will have black splotches where the silver obscured the light shining through the original film. Instead, painting Kodak’s brown toner onto the film can clear up the newest blemishes, and prevent more from developing. If you catch the problem early, applying the toner can prevent it from ever being a problem in the future, and save you from the cost of re-filming. But most spots are there to stay once they’ve developed, and if you don’t catch the problem early, there’ll be no way to recover the lost information.

Problem 3 – Embrittlement

Exposure to heat, moisture, or acidic pollutants in the air or storage containers all cause the gradual decay of the plastics that compose the base of the film. As the plastics deteriorate, they release acids that can further damage the film. The result is brittle, inelastic film that can’t bend or twist without breaking or flaking apart.

If your microfilm is stored on reels, then you won’t be able to unroll it without causing irreparable damage to it. If your microfilm is in the less common fiche form, you might be able to scan or refine it as is, but the further along embrittlement is allowed to progress, the more delicate the fiche cards in your sheets will become, making them vulnerable to the slightest twists and bends.

Solution – Elasticity Solvents and Refilming

Although in the long run, embrittlement is irreversible, it is temporarily reversible if treated with solvents which return some degree of strength and elasticity to the film, for a little while. If done correctly, you can give your film enough elasticity to safely create copies. However, it’s important to keep in mind that the further an embrittlement problem advances, the less useful these solvents will be, and the less likely you are to be able to save your information; so it’s important to check up on your film regularly to screen for decay.

These are only a few of the ways your film records could decay, other problems include distortion/warping, decomposition of the gelatin base, silver fading or mirroring, and mould or fungus growth.

Duplication – Rarity

The other drawback of microfilm is the difficulty of duplication. The technology and expertise to create new microfilms have existed for decades and are still widespread. However, the market dominance of digital technology means that most film creation businesses have withered away, or have had to move on to other business models. The few that remain are usually the only service providers in their local area or have very little competition.

Low competition means that you are stuck with whatever filming businesses are available locally; if they do a good job, then great, but if they don’t they’re still your only option unless you’re comfortable shipping your films several hours drive away to another business you trust more. Limited options also means little to no redundancy: if a filming shop in your area goes out of business or is waiting on rare replacement parts for some of their old machinery, you’ll be out of luck.

In part 2, we’ll review the preventative measures recommended by experts to keep your microfilm viable for as long as possible, and attempt to answer the central question: Should you (still) be using microfilm?

June 10, 2022

Information Security and Digitization: Is Digital More Secure?

So you’re thinking of digitizing your paper files. How will your information security be impacted?

Before we can answer that question, we have to be exact about what “information security” really means. Security, control over your information, is about controlling who can get it, and making sure you can access it when you need it. In other words, security = confidentiality + preservation.

If sensitive information is at risk of being stolen or leaked, then it’s not confidential, and not secure.

If important information is at risk of being lost or destroyed, then it’s not protected, and not secure.

Secure information is protected from both unauthorized access, and damage or loss.

Information Security and Digitization: Is Digital More Secure? 5

How will converting your paper files to digital change your ability to protect them from theft or loss?

Right now, your physical files are stored in one place, and if anyone wants to access the information they contain, they’ll have to get their hands on them. When someone who’s authorized to access them needs to, they’ll need to go to where the files are or bring them along.

If someone who isn’t supposed to can get their hands on the files, they can steal your information, and you may never know. Worse, they could steal the physical file, depriving you of access to the information (unless you made a backup).

The upside is that if you do control who can get their hands on your files, then there’s no way for anyone to get unauthorized access. Storing sensitive documents in a safe or behind a locked door and controlling who can get through leaves thieves no way to get your information. By controlling proximity, you control access.

Information Security and Digitization: Is Digital More Secure? 6

In terms of damage or loss of access, keeping your files in a controlled, weather-proofed storage location will ensure that flooding, water leaks, hostile temperatures, or physical damage, don’t wreck your files. Unless your files need strict temperature and humidity controls (e.g. old paper documents, film, photographs, etc.), you won’t have to depend on electricity or internet connection to preserve them or access the information they contain. Physical damage is your only concern.

How will your concerns change if you make the information digital?

For one, you won’t really have to worry about storage space anymore. The storage efficiency of digital technology is so much better than physical files that it’s hard to wrap your mind around. The last post talked about how a single, one-terabyte hard drive can store around 83 million pages of text. To give a sense of scale, all those pages (printed double-sided, on 0.05mm thick paper) stacked up together would be over two kilometres tall, more than three times the height of the tallest building in the world. Conversely, a one-terabyte external hard drive can probably fit in your coat pocket.

But we’re talking about security, not convenience; why is storage efficiency relevant? Well, the space occupied by your important files is space that you need to protect. If your physical files take up 1000 sq ft of storage space, that’s 1000 sq ft that you need to protect from unauthorized access and environmental hazards like flooding. A smaller space means less to protect, so smaller costs and smaller risks. That 1Tb external harddrive can fit in a small safe or strongbox, making it much easier to secure against bad actors than 83 million physical paper pages.

Storage efficiency also helps with preservation, because it makes creating and storing duplicates easier. If you’ve got 83 million pages of paper documents to preserve, any duplicates you make for posterity will take up just as much space (not to mention costing a huge amount of money and time to print).

Or you could copy the digital files from one hard drive to another, which, depending on the processing speed of your computer, should only take a few minutes. Then you have a complete backup drive, ready to go when you need it, and small enough to conveniently store almost anywhere. Instead of having to build a new locked storage space for filing cabinets, just get another safe or strongbox, place the backup drive inside, and move it somewhere else. It’s that easy.

But digital storage has other benefits too: password protection, encryption, and access tracking. Assuming your drive is connected to a computer so you can view the files, password-protected user accounts let you record who’s gotten access to a file, making access by members of your organization more accountable.

Encryption lets you password protect the files themselves. Even if a drive or a user account password is stolen, the files will be useless without knowing the decryption key. Now proximity isn’t the only factor determining access; people need permission, or the technical aptitude to bypass permission controls.

Information Security and Digitization: Is Digital More Secure? 7

But what about the internet?

This kind of digital storage is great for files you won’t need to access very often, but it doesn’t let you capitalize on one of the greatest benefits of digitization: instant connection via the internet. If your files aren’t just archives, you’ll probably need to share them occasionally, either with members or partners of your organization.

If everyone’s in the same place, this can be done through isolated intranet servers that let multiple computers access the same hard drives. But if your organization isn’t just localized to one facility, or if you need to share files with partners that can’t come by on short notice to pick up a hard drive, you’ll need to be able to access the internet.

Connecting your data storage to the internet presents serious risks. Now that you’re connected, bad actors looking to steal or meddle with your information don’t even have to be physically present to do so. All they need is sufficient aptitude with programming and they can bypass any account protections you put in place or use automated software to brute-force your passwords.

You aren’t completely vulnerable though. A competent I.T. team will know how to minimize cybersecurity risks. Adopting strong antivirus software, frequently changing passwords, and minimizing or eliminating the use of insecure storage devices like thumb drives, are all effective and low-cost measures for mitigating risk from online cybersecurity threats.

Encryption is another great way to reduce the risk because it means that even if someone can bypass all of your other cybersecurity measures, they’ll still need to know the decryption key before they can get your information.

Finally, requiring your organization’s members to complete training about good cybersecurity practices and principles will help protect you from phishing attacks and risky online behaviours (e.g. sending sensitive information with insecure emails, visiting or downloading from insecure sites, etc.).

But no cybersecurity is perfect. Exploring the risks and benefits of every available cybersecurity practice or software is well beyond the scope of this post, but it’s important to remember that there’s no way to be 100% sure when it comes to online information security. The field of cybersecurity is incredibly competitive and always changing. This is because cybersecurity professionals and practices are locked into a constant struggle with cyber criminals trying to steal information.

Keeping your internet-connected information as safe as possible means competing for extremely high demand, industry-leading I.T. professionals, and being able to change your digital infrastructure and practices rapidly and frequently. The closer you get to perfect cybersecurity, the more difficult and expensive it gets to keep improving.

Perfect cybersecurity is impossible, and the next best thing can be very expensive. And even if your protection is as good as possible, just one breach can still compromise enormous amounts of information. Information Security and Digitization: Is Digital More Secure? 8

How do I know what level of risk is acceptable for my organization?

For most organizations, it’s more reasonable to simply accept that internet-connected data storage will always have some degree of risk. Your organization will need to decide what level of risk is acceptable and cost-effective for its specific needs and circumstances. Though a full guide on cybersecurity practices is beyond the scope of this post, you should consider two broad factors in any cost-benefit analysis: the likelihood of being targetted, and the cost to your organization if an attack is successful.

How much of a target are you? Though thinking of your information as unsecured may be uncomfortable, any money and time spent on cybersecurity you don’t need is time and money wasted. If your organization and its data are not likely to be seen as a high-profile target, you don’t need to worry as much. But what makes you a high or low-profile target? Here’s a non-exhaustive list of some important factors to consider:

How visible is your organization? – Less well-known organizations have less to fear from online hackers or malware for the simple reason that fewer people know they exist. This means that small businesses or businesses that don’t interact with the public very much are less likely to be targeted by cybercriminals.
How big is your organization? – Bigger business means bigger budgets, thus, a bigger payout for cybercriminals. Even if an organization isn’t very publicly visible (e.g. industry-facing parts manufacturers), financially motivated cyber criminals will always look for big payouts. Even if they don’t or can’t directly steal your money, a ransomware attack can cost you millions of dollars. Cybercriminals expect that organizations with more money will be able to pay bigger ransoms and that they may even be more likely to pay large ransoms since the amount demanded represents a smaller portion of their revenue.
How many people do you employ? – In terms of information security, every employee that does their job using the internet is a potential point of failure. Phishing attacks are becoming increasingly common and sophisticated, and many people don’t know how to differentiate between deceptive and genuine correspondence over email. It’s not their fault, of course, not everyone has the time to familiarize themselves with cybersecurity news and practices; that’s what the folks in I.T. are for. Every employee is likely to be a target sooner or later, so it’s vitally important to educate your workforce against these kinds of imitative attacks.
How important is your information to the world? – The more a piece of information matters, the more it will sell for on the black market. If your organization handles critically important files or data (e.g. SIN numbers, banking information, etc.), you’re likely to be a target regardless of your size or public visibility.

How important is information security to your business model? In economic terminology, Risk = Cost x Probability. If you’re a likely target, your probability of a cybersecurity breach is higher, but the cost depends on the nature of the information, as well as the importance of information security to your clients. Of course, any information entrusted to your organization as part of its business is important, and ought to be protected. But security breaches can be more costly for some businesses than others.

Anytime a financial institution has a digital security breach, people lose money, and the bank loses clients and reputation as a result. A non-profit organization that can’t safeguard confidential information will likely lose funding, donors, and reputation as a result, and be less able to accomplish its mission as a result.

The information collected by other businesses may not be as important, however, and so a cybersecurity breach wouldn’t be as devastating to their bottom line. Even if your organization’s probability of being targeted by cybercriminals or automated malware is low, if the cost associated with a security breach is unacceptable, you’re better off taking every precaution you can afford. Ask yourself “How would our clients/donors/constituents feel if we couldn’t protect their information?”

So, what does this all mean?

We started out by asking what digitization of your paper files will do for your information security. The answer to that question depends on how you choose to store the newly digitized information and how well you protect it.

Information Security and Digitization: Is Digital More Secure? 9 — *Summary of Information Security Pros & Cons for Digitization Solutions*

Let’s assume you’re going to take good care of your data. It’s a fair assumption, since you cared enough about it to read this far, and since information security is important to any organization that uses digital technology. This means employing (and listening to) competent I.T. professionals, taking reasonable precautions with local and online digital information, and providing your employees with some degree of training on good digital security practices. Anywhere you can improve security while remaining cost-effective, you do.

As for the choice of storage, which kind you choose will depend on your priorities. Almost every organization in the digital age needs to have some degree of internet connectivity, so you’ll probably need connected storage systems.

However, adopting a hybrid storage model where/when possible can give you peace of mind. Hybrid storage just means having both isolated and connected storage systems at the same time. Files that you don’t need to access very often, or that you cannot afford to risk, can be stored on an isolated drive or server so that there’s no chance of losing the cybersecurity race against hackers or malware.

In order to keep the isolated storage truly isolated, you have to tightly control who can bridge the gap between them and how. The fewer members of your organization who can do this, the easier it will be to ensure it remains secure. Members given this responsibility should have a decent working knowledge of cybersecurity risks, and be rigorously vetted to make sure they’re trustworthy.

The method in which the bridging happens also needs to be strictly controlled. Momentarily opening up a direct connection from an internet-connected server to an isolated server is out of the question, no matter how brief that connection is; because undetected malware can implant itself or send messages across that gap nearly instantly. If your information is important enough to put on an isolated server, then it’s just not worth the risk.

Instead, using a secure external storage device to ferry files from one drive to another, only by those qualified and authorized members discussed earlier, is the safer way to go. If you want to be extra careful, you could maintain strict digital hygiene by requiring these members to check the ferry device for malware on a trusted machine between every use.

So, the final answer to the question: “Will Digitizing my files increase my information security?” Yes, if you maintain good digital security protocols, and use internet-isolated storage where possible.

For businesses like Consentia, a single information security breach could compromise an entire contract, not to mention the relationship with the client. That’s why we take every step we can to make sure that the only people who ever get access to our client’s information is the client themselves.
Information Security and Digitization: Is Digital More Secure? 10

When you give us your sensitive or confidential physical files for scanning, we make sure they stay locked behind two different locked doors at all times. All of our employees have passed criminal record checks and signed NDAs, and are also just people we know we can trust. Any and all cameras, including cell phones, are not allowed near physical documents. Any non-employees who come to the office are signed in when they arrive, supervised throughout their entire visit, and signed out when they depart.

Our digital storage system, as well as any conversion process involving a computer, is done on an air-gapped server, completely isolated from the internet. Employees working on your data have password-protected user accounts, so access is only provided to authorized employees, and can be traced back to the individual.

We are committed to ensuring your files stay safe and confidential the whole time they’re in our care. For secure digitization services you know you can trust, choose Consentia.

June 3, 2022

Will Paper Ever Be Obsolete?

In many ways, paper already is obsolete. Most of the modern world’s transmission and storage of information is done with digital technology, due to the speed and efficiency it offers relative to physical files. Most people are already intimately familiar with how close to instantaneous digital communication is, as we send each other messages over email, video chat, and social media many times everyday.

The scale of its space-saving efficiency is a little harder to grasp though. Here’s an example:

A one terabyte hard drive, which can come as cheap as $50 on Amazon, can store over 83,000,000 pages of text. Printing all of those pages, single-sided, onto 0.1mm thick paper, would produce a stack over 8.3 kilometers high. That’s more than 10 times the height of the Burj Khalifa, currently the tallest building in the world. If we scale that back to 0.05mm paper, and we print it double-sided, that’s still over 2 kilometers tall, still more than three Burj Khalifas.

Standard consumer-grade printers can typically print between 20-40 black and white pages per minute, so one could print all those pages in anywhere from 34,580 – 69,170 hours, or 4-8 years of non-stop printing. Factoring in standard consumer ink and paper prices, which work out to about 5.4 cents per page, this monumental print job would cost you roughly $4.5 million. Or, you could use gigabit internet to download all of it onto your $50 hard drive in a little over 2 hours.

So then if digital tech is that much more efficient than paper, why do most of us still interact with it on a regular basis? Important files are still created, copied, and stored in paper formats by governments, hospitals, large companies, and other organizations. Most of us still send or receive paper letters and flyers in the mail; have paper copies of our important documents like our bank statements and tax forms; and own at least a few hard-copy books. Digital equivalents exist for all of these purposes; and in fact digital tools are usually used to create these physical documents. So then why haven’t we gotten rid of paper entirely?

Bureaucratic Inertia

One big factor is just system-inertia; in simpler words: not having gotten around to it yet. We live in societies which have used paper for these purposes for centuries, and though change can come faster or slower, it is never instantaneous. Though it is often said that we are now living in the digital age, not everything which could be digital is yet. Organizations considering whether to implement a new system may be hesitant to trade a system which has been working reliably for something new and unfamiliar, or they may decide that the up-front cost of transitioning to a new solution isn’t justified by the benefits it offers.

But technological and bureaucratic inertia cannot be the only factor, because new processes involving paper are implemented by organizations all the time. If inertia was the only factor, any new paper documents created would have to be part of processes and procedures that predate the onset of the digital age. Additionally, many efficient organizations continue to use paper where effective digital alternatives are readily available; it’s unlikely that this is solely due to bureaucratic inertia.

The fact that it’s still being used for new processes means that paper must have some benefits of its own that digital technology can’t provide; at least, not at the same low cost. The obvious advantages of paper are low-cost access, independence from technology, and high flexibility.

Economic Inertia

Per page of text, digital is far cheaper to create, store, and share, but only if you have a digital system in place to facilitate those advantages. Despite the increasing digitalization of our modern world, there are many processes which would just not be as efficient if they were totally digital, due to the high up-front cost of establishing digital systems.

There are many processes or functions where paper and other non-digital information systems are used, for which there are reliable digital alternatives available:

A teacher printing off paper assignment sheets for his students could instead email PDF documents to their school email accounts, that they could complete on school-provided laptops or other devices.
A doctor taking paper notes during a check-up with a patient could instead type her notes into a computer, or use a stylus to write them onto a tablet, and then save or send them instantly.
The leader of an organization holding a team-meeting might print off paper meeting agendas, when he could instead share a list of discussion topics with one of the many digital teamwork tools available for free online.
A government department might use digital technology to type a letter addressing a member of the public, then print it on paper, and mail it to the individual, spending substantially more money to do so than it would have cost to send the same message via email.
An advocacy group may print off paper flyers and brochures to get their message across to the public, when they could instead reach many more people through their phones via social media adverts.

For each of these examples, you might have been thinking: “but these do sometimes get digitized.” Well, you’d be right; but the point is that not all are. There is a common factor separating these realities from their possibilities: money.

Well-funded institutions and successful corporations in prosperous societies may have sufficient financial access to these technologies to begin the process of complete digitalization. But for many others, adopting fully-digital solutions is prohibitively expensive. Until they receive better funding or experience greater success; or until the price of implementing and maintaining digital solutions decreases below an accessible threshold, such organizations will depend on paper to manage, communicate, and store their information.

This advantage for paper is likely to evaporate as the world economy continues to grow and technology continues to advance. As developing societies build more and better electricity and internet infrastructure, the cost barrier for digital solutions recedes, both for domestic and foreign organizations. Unlike bureaucratic inertia, paper’s advantage of lower up-front cost will remain until the technological and/or economic circumstances of these processes change.

As these forms of inertia recede, more processes and businesses will transition into the digital world in order to harness the advantages digital systems provide. Digitization processes like paper scanning and document imaging will be at the heart of these transitions, as organizations seek to bring their old paper files into their new digital system. If economic growth and social progress continue internationally, there will one day be a point when these kinds of system-inertia dissipate, resulting in such digitization needs drying up completely.

But even if this occurs, and we find ourselves in a maximally digital world all across the globe, it is unlikely that paper will ever fully disappear. As a physical, tangible format, paper has two key advantages over intangible digital formats: independence from technology, and near universal flexibility.

Independence from Technology

As technology advances, the infrastructure which supports it must also advance in complexity and scale. Electronic hardware requires cheap, accessible electric power. Interconnected digital systems require cheap, accessible wireless and wired internet and intranet solutions. Mass production of new digital devices and accessories requires mines and factories and distribution centers in order to be built and then made available to the average person. Each new system and process which is added to the increasingly interdependent puzzle of the digitalized economy is one more point of failure which could disrupt the rest of the puzzle.

Of course, there’s little need for alarm. For every point of failure there is a redundancy, a market feedback loop, or a public policy which can help mitigate the difficulties that result from a problem at one point in the system. But system disruptions caused by things like supply-chain bottlenecks, energy scarcity, or natural disasters can still cost your organization precious time and money if you’re not prepared.

For a totally digital organization, a blackout means a complete stop to business until it’s resolved; a fully-remote organization will have serious problems if local internet infrastructure goes down. Without highly competent IT professionals, digital information security and efficiency can’t be assured. And those professionals can quit suddenly, become sick or incapacitated, and will sometimes make mistakes.

Paper offers a cheap, highly accessible redundancy for these kinds of inevitable (though hopefully rare) disruptions. Paper files won’t be affected by power failures, internet outages, or digital system malfunctions.

Previously we’ve discussed at length just how much more efficient digital systems are than paper if you have enough funding and access to afford the upfront costs, so it’s by no means advisable to have complete paper backups for all of your files, especially when digital data can be so easily duplicated and decentralized. (Fully protecting your information with redundant digital back-ups is not just possible, it’s relatively easy.) But nothing can beat the certainty of a paper backup for a critically important document you may need at any moment.

If you want a place to store a mass amount of information just in case you might need it someday, then redundant digital archiving in your own hard-drives or external cloud storage options are probably your best bet. But if you have important information you expect to use regularly and need to be able to access quickly, having paper back-ups might be a very good idea.

Input and Sharing Flexibility

Flexibility might sound like a strange advantage to award to paper over digital systems, especially when digital files can rapidly be changed into different formats, instantly sent to different people and locations, and such a variety of digital devices exist through which we can access those files.

However, this seeming flexibility is only possible because of the incredible variety of software available for interacting with digital information. Every ability that digital systems afford had to be conceptualized, then developed, then programmed into the software you’re using.

For example: when you type out an email, every letter, font, or symbol has to be built into the system ahead of time. If you need to discuss a certain symbol or image, or use characters from another language’s alphabet, that needs to have already been an option in the system before you required it.

By contrast, a piece of paper and a pen offer infinite possibility. Many powerful tools exist for taking notes on lectures, meetings, or documents; but the user needs to accommodate the way they use it to the options made available by the software developers.

Want to change the layout or the formatting on a document you’re writing? You’ll usually have to search through multiple menus and options to get the options you prefer, if what you’re looking for exists in the software. With a piece of paper, you can write whatever you want wherever and however you want to on the page.

Want to add a note in the margins? Better deselect the main text body and switch to a different input mode to add something; or select a portion to add a comment on the side that’s not a part of the document and probably locked into this particular file type.

Sometimes, especially when sketching out or reflecting on an idea for the first time, you may not even know what kind of format or layout you want to use, so the infinite input-flexibility of paper is much more accommodating.

And then there’s the occasional issue with compatibility between software. If your team or organization needs to adopt a new software tool, it needs to be one which is compatible with all your other tools for digital’s flexibility benefits to be realized. If your team wants to collaborate with a different organization or team, you may come to the table with very different tools and systems, and that mismatch can cause problems for productivity. Using paper meeting agendas, paper memos, lettermail, and signed forms save you from having to jump through technological hoops and headaches to share your information with partners.

Not everyone can sympathize with these quibbles some of us have with digital systems, as many people are quite content with the digital tools available in their current forms. Input-inflexibility is also a declining problem for digital technology, as input methods become more and more diverse and accessible. The same could be said of sharing-inflexibility, as teamwork tools get more diverse and advanced, and market trends converge around just a handful of commonly used softwares (e.g. Teams, Zoom, Meets, etc.). Also some collaborations or teams just don’t have the option to stick with physical formats, if their business is online, or their partners prohibitively far away.

The infinite (though localized) flexibility of paper did not prevent it from being largely out-competed by digital alternatives, and it won’t prevent paper from becoming an even more rarely used system as more of the world gets access to those alternatives. But it may keep some amount of paper in our systems and institutions forever, as some individuals or teams do prefer it for its simplicity and certainty.

Paper is already mostly obsolete. A single terabyte hard-drive contains more than 3 Burj Khalifas of paper information, costs a tiny fraction of the price to produce and store, and with modern internet speeds, it can all be transmitted anywhere in the world in just fractions of a second per page. And that’s only a tiny portion of most modern organizations’ data storage needs. By comparison, paper is expensive to print, stuck in one place, and takes up a lot more space. In terms of storage efficiency, accessibility, and ease of duplication, there’s no contest.

Paper is also becoming increasingly obsolete as technological advancement and economic growth give more and more people access to digital alternatives. Not only does paper represent a minority of the world’s data storage, it’s a shrinking minority.

But it’s unlikely that paper will ever be totally obsolete. Paper doesn’t require expensive and occasionally dysfunctional technological infrastructure to serve its purpose. It provides a sense of certainty and reliability that can’t ever be fully matched by digital information. And it allows for an infinite flexibility of input that digital technologies can mimic, but only at much higher cost. For a lot of people, paper is a preference, and one that’s unlikely to evaporate any time soon.

It’s often said that we now live in a digital age, but perhaps it would be more accurate to say that we’re transitioning into one. It’s tempting to think that such a transition has a neat, tidy end point, at some point in the uncertain future, when all of our information management will be mediated by digital systems. Though it’s impossible to be certain, the reality is likely to be much too disorganized to have a clear, distinct end point; just as it did not have a specific, distinct starting point. Some amount of paper is likely to remain integrated into our information systems, even though the vast majority of the world’s data is managed digitally.

Whatever the future holds, the smooth and productive coexistence of digital and analog information systems requires digitization. Organizations that keep paper in their processes will need to find streamlined, cost-effective ongoing digitization solutions if they want those documents to be compatible with the rest of their information. Other organizations will need accurate, efficient, and timely customized bulk scanning solutions to turn stacks of old paper records into more efficient digital files. Whatever steps your organization needs to take with digitization, Consentia can help you through it, with insightful consulting, or secure and efficient outsourced services.

December 7, 2020

Electronic Health Records (EHRs) Save Lives: The Essential Need to Transition from Paper to Digital Records

We live in a digital world where everything is going electronic—and as it should be. But, when it comes to the medical world it may be surprising to know that many patient files or medical records are still in paper forms and ultimately slowing down medical care.

In recent decades, Electronic Health Records (EHRs) have been taking the medical industry by storm—especially and critically more so in recent times. In a transition away from long paper trails, hospitals and clinics have been digitizing their medical records management. The hope is that EHRs won’t just be more efficient: they’ll save lives.

The impact of converting paper records to EHRs, and digital documentation in general, can be evident on many levels that include:

1. Emergency care

Health emergencies are often complicated by lack of information. Health workers who arrive on the scene of an emergency don’t necessarily know a patient’s background. With EHRs, emergency workers could have instant access to a patient’s file, informing care. This could range from a patient’s blood type to his/her current health conditions. Imagine emergency workers who already know when they arrive that the patient has a history of heart failure, for example.

2. Red flag alerts

However, EHRs go beyond emergency care. Digital medical records management gives doctors access to a plethora of information. This may include updates about patients, or potential dangers with their care plan. For example, if a doctor prescribes a medication and enters it into the system, a red flag alert could appear about a potential drug interaction that may affect the patient. Red flag alerts are great for keeping drug allergies, missed appointments and other key information top of mind.

3. Aid in diagnosis

Some medical records management systems also go one step further and incorporate AI. With it, doctors can use the management system as a diagnosis aid, with AI suggesting potential conditions and treatments. This type of AI-powered system could help reduce medical error and let doctors weigh all the options.

4. Real-time coordination among experts

The current system of referrals, with patients moving among health experts, can result in non-coordinated care. It’s typical for a patient to experience delays between appointments, a lack of communication and overall non-integrated care. Sometimes vital treatment falls through the cracks and patients are unable to receive the timely care they need. With EHRs, medical experts are able to collaborate in real-time, allowing for consultations, test results and other medical decisions to take place as a coordinated effort. (Good results with EHRs have already been recorded in lung cancer patients.)

5. Personalized health monitoring

Finally, converting medical records to electronic ones can be helpful for monitoring patient health outside the clinic. Doctors can get automatic real-time monitoring of patient health through apps or wearables. This type of digital documentation keeps them updated on the essential and allows informed decision-making with data.

It’s a simple idea: EHRs can save lives. Through digital documentation, health staff work together for better outcomes.

Consentia is proudly equipped with the right experts and technology to help institutions convert medical records to the cloud. Get more information here.

November 5, 2020

Cloud-Based Medical Records Will Be Essential for 5G Healthcare

5G will transform healthcare as we know it. With ultra-fast internet speed, health workers will be able to collaborate in real-time in amazing ways. Imagine what 5G ambulances could potentially do: instantly access a patient’s medical records via the cloud, send vitals to the hospital in commute, or get video feed from an expert surgeon if the patient is too far and needs attention fast.

A big part of creating this real-time health network is cloud storage. Let’s take a closer look at why taking medical records to the cloud will be essential.

Medical records to the cloud

Converting medical records to digital or the cloud for simpler, instant access is a must. A patient can often see several different clinics or medical specialists during a health problem, which means these records ideally need to be shared among them all. Moreover, instant access to complete and updated health records via the cloud could help inform emergency care.

Other health apps and devices

However, it’s not just about transforming these health records to the cloud. Health apps and devices will need to connect to 5G and the data they generate needs a digital home. As health workers growingly use apps and devices in their daily work, these reports will also require cloud support.

A future with health AI

In the future, 5G health may also receive a hand from AI. Health AI could potentially be used to diagnose patients and train health workers. It will need health data to learn from, which means that data stored on the cloud will likely be required to get AI implemented.

Conclusion: Cloud storage is overall beneficial

Cloud storage is overall the best solution for health systems. First and foremost it will likely save lives, as emergency care will be better informed, shared, and updated with medical records on the cloud. In addition, cloud storage can support real-time collaboration and improve health workflow across the board. Of course keeping security in mind also means that confidential patient information will be kept under strong security measures.

Cloud storage doesn’t sound as cool as 5G, but it’s an essential tool for medical records management and supporting future healthcare success.

Interested in learning more about how to convert medical records to electronic? Get in touch with one of our team members to answer your questions.

Consentia is moving workflows digital. We provide document scanning and imaging solutions to convert paper and hard copy documents, records, and papers to digital versions. Located in Edmonton, Alberta, Consentia operates in compliance with:

FOIP: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
ISMD: Information Security Management Directives to which we are routinely audited by the Alberta Government.

1 2 34