Partnership Agreement for Public Comment

Since 2007, NARA has engaged in digitization partnerships to expand the online collections we can make available to the public. We are excited to announce that the partnership agreement with is ready for public comment. is a privately held UK-based online genealogy service owned by British company DC Thomson Family History. You can learn more about here:

The partnership agreement is available for public review and comment on our Digitization Partnerships page. To submit feedback, please email, or leave a comment below.

The agreement will be available for comment until September 25, 2015.

Please consult NARA’s Principles for Partnerships for more information about our digitization partnerships.

8 thoughts on “ Partnership Agreement for Public Comment

  1. The date for comments above is September 25, however on the digitization partnership page the deadline is listed as September 19, 2015. Which is the correct date?
    Jan Meisels Allen
    Chairperson, IAJGS Public Records Access Monitoring Committee

  2. Dear Ms. Allen,

    The correct date is September 25, 2015. We are in the process of updating our Partnerships webpage to reflect the correct date.

    Thank you,
    Onaona Guay

    Digitization Partnerships Coordinator
    National Archives and Records Administration

  3. That digitization is performed by so many entrepreneurs indicates that it is a commercial activity ,and not an “inherently governmental function” as defined in OMB Circular A-76 That the so-called “partners” of NARA may reap inurement from such “partnership agreements” does not work contrary to the public interest, as demonstrated by th success of prior NARA “partnerships” That some of those “partnerships” are with academic institutions or academicians can only boost academic research, which redounds to the benefit of the public.

    1. Per OMB Circular A-76, “The longstanding policy of the federal government has been to rely on the private sector for needed commercial services. To ensure that the American people receive maximum value for their tax dollars, commercial activities should be subject to the forces of competition.” The arrangements in the so-called “partnership agreements” effectively procure the digitization for NARA at no cost; the epitome of the competitive process.

      — KHR [Former Contracting Officer, Dept. of Defense.]

      1. Mr. Ryesky, you would be correct if, in fact, there were actually “competition” among the profit-making entities selling NARA records online to the exclusion of everyone else. However, there is not, at least not when it comes to certain types of records. NARA “partners” are working together as part of one huge profit-making monopoly run by a church. They have carefully crafted their subscription sites so as not to duplicate any records between the two, even though the contracts were supposed to be “non-exclusive”. Do you think this was a coincidence? This church gives free subscriptions to these record databases to all of their church members, and charge outrageous “subscription fees” for the same records to every other taxpaying American who does NOT pledge and tithe to their particular religion. Just what is THAT the epitome of?! The government is saying the only people who have a right to see the Civil War pension files for free, and profit from selling the copies/images, are the Mormons. Obviously, those of us who are not Mormons have a real problem with that. See my previous blog posts if you want specifics as to what I’m talking about.

        1. Of course, the supply and demand laws we all learn in Econ 101 do not and cannot operate amidst an atmosphere of Antitrust law violations. “Staffer” is on to something, perhaps.

  4. I only see a profit making situation for, Find My Past, we have enough companies, requiring
    payment for public records, We feed them free information, and they sell it to somebody else

  5. Will this include free access to their services thru computers in NARA facilities, in the way that Ancestry and Fold3 are available? And, if it does, will it be for unrestricted access to their sites, ot only to selected databases?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *