Document Control
| Field | Detail |
|---|---|
| Purpose | One master blueprint covering the institutional case, mandate alignment, operating model, people model, technical architecture, working demonstration, roadmap, and measures for a connected statewide heritage service. |
| Primary audience | THC leadership and commissioners; program staff; TDEC and Strategic Technology Solutions (STS) partners; implementation partners; project advocates and funders. |
| What changed in v2 | Corrected against a direct review of the live THC website (June 2026); reconciled to the deployed Heritage OS demonstration; tightened throughout; sharpened the line between systems THC already runs and the connective layer this proposes. |
| Research basis | The live THC website and program pages; current public staff titles; Tennessee statutes (Title 4, Chapter 11); the 2019–2029 statewide preservation plan; the 2024 Comptroller performance audit; state technology, records, AI, and accessibility requirements; comparable state preservation platforms. |
| Working premise | Heritage OS augments current systems and professional processes. It connects them around shared data, workflow, county service, public access, partner management, and measurable outcomes. It replaces nothing. |
| Status | A working blueprint for leadership discussion, technical discovery, and a 90-day demonstration. Not an adopted Commission plan. It makes no legal determinations; statutory references are for planning only. |
How to read this blueprint
Sections 1–4 establish why a connective operating model fits THC's present mission and where the current delivery model leaves gaps. Sections 5–8 define the operating and technical model. Sections 9–11 turn the concept into a working demonstration, a phased program, and a decision package. Appendices preserve the staff-role map, the controlled vocabulary, a one-page brief, and the research sources.
Five minutes: read Section 1 and Appendix C. Deciding whether to authorize: read Sections 1, 9, and 11.
1. Executive Summary
A statewide operating model, not another standalone website or campaign.
The Tennessee Historical Commission holds broad statutory authority and runs strong, specialized programs. What it lacks is the connective tissue between them. The public meets THC as a set of separate program pages, portals, forms, and contacts. People begin with a place, a problem, or a question. They rarely begin knowing which program their need belongs to.
Tennessee Heritage OS connects THC's duties, SHPO responsibilities, programs, site partnerships, data systems, public content, local-government assistance, and reporting into one visible statewide service. It makes the Commission easier to use from the outside and easier to manage from the inside.
1.1 The recommendation
Authorize a 90-day working demonstration using five counties to show the full model in miniature, with 95 to 1 as the first public campaign. Preserve every current system of record and all professional authority. Add a shared county index, a guided public front door, a staff dashboard, an intake-and-routing layer, partner evidence, and repeatable reporting.
This is no longer hypothetical. A working demonstration is already deployed at heritage-os-tn.codyboring.workers.dev. It runs on a tested engine, carries real THC records imported from the Commission's own published data services, and shows the statewide county map, the live county profile, and the submit-to-queue loop end to end. This blueprint describes the full model; the demonstration already proves the core of it works.
1.2 The strategic hierarchy
| Layer | Name | What it does |
|---|---|---|
| Master vision | What the Commission could be | A visible, useful, accountable statewide heritage institution. |
| Operating system | Tennessee Heritage OS | The shared service, data, workflow, partner, public-access, and reporting model. |
| First campaign | 95 to 1 | County-by-county proof that every part of Tennessee can see and use THC. |
| Public promise | Every County Has a Story | The invitation that brings citizens and local partners into the record. |
| Operating principle | Common Ground | History and preservation as shared civic infrastructure. |
| Economic case | Preservation Builds Communities | Connect preservation to reinvestment, tourism, education, identity, and reuse. |
| Service cycle | Collect · Review · Preserve · Publish · Teach · Fund · Protect · Report | The repeatable lifecycle behind every engine and campaign. |
1.3 What Heritage OS Is and Is Not
This boundary is the single most important commitment in the document. Getting it wrong is the fastest way to lose staff trust and waste money.
| Heritage OS IS | Heritage OS is NOT |
|---|---|
| A coordination, engagement, and evidence layer across current programs and systems. | A replacement for e106, ServiceNow, Survey123, ArcGIS, TN.gov, the TDEC grants system, or NPS / NARA records. |
| A county and user-need lens that lets people enter through their problem, not a program name. | A system that turns public submissions into official eligibility, designation, protection, or grant approval. |
| A way to update a record once and power many outputs, page, map, brief, dashboard, report, partner task. | A marketing-only website, a new statutory program, or a public map of sensitive archaeological or cemetery locations. |
| A state-owned, portable platform whose data, standards, and exports stay under state control. | A technology project owned by an outside vendor. |
1.4 The central proposition
The distinctive Tennessee model is not one giant database. It is a unified statewide service architecture: authoritative systems stay authoritative, expert staff keep control, sensitive records stay protected, and one shared operating layer makes the whole Commission visible, measurable, and easy to use. The law created the authority. The existing programs created the tools. Heritage OS creates the connected system.
2. The Institutional Reality Today
A capable statewide institution whose programs are stronger than the connective tissue between them.
2.1 Current institutional profile
| Dimension | Current state |
|---|---|
| Legal position | Independent state agency administratively attached to TDEC; serves as Tennessee's State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). |
| Staff | About twenty professional staff, deeply specialized across federal programs, grants, tax credits, Section 106, survey and GIS, the National Register, local-government assistance, sites, markers, cemeteries, and military heritage. |
| Boards | A twenty-member volunteer Commission; a State Review Board; the Monuments and Memorials Commission; the Tennessee Wars Commission. |
| State historic sites | Seventeen state-owned properties, operated day to day through partner organizations. |
| National Register | More than 2,000 Tennessee entries, at least one in every county. Published as an ArcGIS dataset and public viewer. |
| Historical markers | About 2,000 markers; roughly twenty new placed annually; missing and damaged markers depend on public and local reporting. |
| Survey and GIS | An ongoing survey supported by Survey123 and the Commission's ArcGIS viewer; inventory grows as resources reach fifty years of age. |
| Federal review | Section 106 submissions through the e106 portal; responses through ServiceNow. THC is a mandatory consulting party for federal undertakings in Tennessee. |
| Funding | Historic Preservation Fund grants and historic tax credits run through the TDEC grants system; a Historic Property / Land Acquisition Fund and Wars Commission grants operate separately. |
| Public interpretation | The Courier, markers, historic sites, Merit Awards, news, events, program guidance, and public meetings. |
2.2 The service experience today
The THC website is organized around institutional programs. That structure assumes the visitor already knows whether a need belongs to the National Register, survey, Section 106, markers, cemeteries, local-government assistance, grants, or a site. Most people do not. They begin with a place, a project, or a question. Heritage OS supplies the service layer that meets them there and routes them to the right existing program.
What already exists, and it is good. THC already publishes a public ArcGIS viewer, a cemetery register and map, and a state-historic-sites dataset. Heritage OS does not duplicate these. It connects to them, gives them a county lens and a guided front door, and links back to each authoritative source. The deployed demonstration already imports from these services.
2.3 High expertise, limited connective capacity
The constraint is not a lack of mission knowledge. A small expert staff must run complex regulatory, grant, asset, partnership, research, and public-service portfolios at once. No public title signals ownership of a cross-program digital service, accessibility, or data governance. Heritage OS should reduce duplicate work and create clear, distributed ownership, not add a silo.
2.4 A leadership window
THC is recruiting permanent executive leadership, and the next statewide preservation plan must follow the 2019–2029 plan. Designing Heritage OS now lets the next plan be measurable from the start. Present it as an executive operating and accountability model, not a communications or IT project.
3. Mandate Alignment
Heritage OS is a modern delivery model for responsibilities THC already holds.
The argument is not a new mission. It is making the existing mission easier to execute, coordinate, demonstrate, and access. Statutes below are summarized for planning and must be verified against the official Tennessee Code before any formal action.
3.1 Statute and federal duty, mapped to capability
| Authority | In plain terms | Heritage OS capability |
|---|---|---|
| T.C.A. § 4-11-103 | Rules, reports to the Governor and General Assembly, administration of public historical funds, financial discipline. | Portfolio dashboards; grant and partner evidence; board and legislative reports; audit trail. |
| § 4-11-104 | Criteria for evaluating state historic sites and properties seeking state aid. | Readiness model; transparent criteria; county opportunity pipeline; evaluation history. |
| § 4-11-106 | Authority to establish advisory boards and committees, including the cemetery advisory committee. | Committee workspaces; member records; agendas; action logs; public reports. |
| § 4-11-107 | Accept gifts and bequests; acquire properties of statewide significance. | Protected acquisition pipeline tracking significance, ownership, urgency, due diligence. |
| § 4-11-108 | Authority over state-owned property; contracts with local governments and nonprofits; periodic review. | Historic Sites Network; partner portal; obligations; inspections; maintenance; outcomes. |
| § 4-11-109 | Inactive public records may transfer to the Commission for permanent preservation. | Records provenance, transfer, retention, archival packages, access controls. |
| § 4-11-111 | State entities must consult THC before demolition, alteration, or transfer of significant state property. | State-property review queue; deadlines; known-resource context; written record. |
| NHPA / SHPO | Survey, inventory, federal assistance, National Register nominations, advice to governments, Section 106. | Survey and inventory integration; tiered access; local assistance; project workflow; reporting. |
3.2 The legal-operational boundary
95 to 1 is not an expansion beyond the mission. Heritage OS is a county-based, program-connected delivery system for the mission already assigned to THC.
Public submissions are leads, stories, observations, or requests, not official determinations. Only authorized staff and boards make eligibility, listing, regulatory, grant, acquisition, or waiver decisions. Every public-facing record states its source, status, authority, last-review date, and limitations.
4. Gaps and Opportunity
The gap is not authority. It is integration, service design, evidence, and statewide visibility.
| Gap | Consequence today | Heritage OS response |
|---|---|---|
| Program fragmentation | Accurate programs experienced as separate pages, portals, and contacts. | A shared service catalog, program routing, a county index, cross-program links. |
| No county lens | The public cannot see THC's full footprint in one county or district. | A standard county service page and internal county record for all 95 counties. |
| Multiple front doors | Users must choose a program before staff can help. | One guided intake that routes submissions and questions to the right process. |
| Uneven provenance | Official, federal, partner, and public information appear together with no shared status vocabulary. | Mandatory source, authority, verification, sensitivity, and last-reviewed fields. |
| Limited lifecycle evidence | Site monitoring, partner obligations, and disaster plans lack reliable schedules. | A partner and site compliance workspace with inspections, alerts, exceptions, evidence. |
| Accessibility and archives | Older public files were created to different standards. | Accessible-first templates, a remediation queue, document status, lifecycle ownership. |
| Weak activity-to-outcome line | Work is reported program by program; statewide impact is hard to show. | Common metrics and auto-generated county, district, board, and annual reports. |
| No visible product ownership | No public title signals responsibility for the digital service. | An executive sponsor, an operating product owner, a data council, a delivery partner. |
| Content freshness | Pages, lists, maps, and links change on different schedules. | Review cadences, freshness metrics, outputs generated from one updated record. |
The 2024 Comptroller performance audit is a design input here, not a live indictment. Its themes, procurement controls, site-monitoring evidence, current disaster plans, are exactly the use cases a shared operating layer institutionalizes through schedules, ownership, documentation, and audit-ready records.
5. Tennessee Heritage OS
The connective operating layer for statewide preservation service.
5.1 North star
Any Tennessean, partner, professional, commissioner, legislator, or staff member should be able to begin with a place or a need and understand: what THC knows, which program applies, what is official, what is sensitive, who owns the next action, what help is available, and what result has been achieved.
5.2 The eight-step service cycle
| Step | What happens |
|---|---|
| Collect | Receive records, surveys, stories, questions, files, observations, applications, partner reports, field data. |
| Review | Route to the right program, validate source and authority, screen for sensitivity, assign professional review. |
| Preserve | Maintain authoritative records, provenance, documents, media, retention, backups, archival exports. |
| Publish | Expose approved public information through county pages, maps, guides, stories, markers, program content. |
| Teach | Convert verified material into classroom, site, community, and professional learning resources. |
| Fund | Identify readiness, grant pathways, tax incentives, acquisition tools, and technical assistance, and route to the right portal. |
| Protect | Support review, maintenance, monitoring, easements, partner obligations, threat response, and preservation alternatives. |
| Report | Produce county, district, board, program, plan, grant, audit, and statewide impact evidence. |
5.3 The ten operating engines
Each engine is a coherent area of service. They share one data layer, one identity model, and one set of access rules. The deployed demonstration already realizes several of them; the status column is honest about which.
| Engine | Purpose | Demo status |
|---|---|---|
| County Service | One view of THC activity, resources, partners, needs, and service in each county. The home of 95 to 1. | Built: 95-county map, county profiles, and briefs. |
| Historic Resource | Connects survey, National Register, markers, cemeteries, sites, and thematic inventories under one resource identity. | Built: real survey and National Register records imported and mapped. |
| Review & Protection | Supports state-property consultation, Section 106 context, threats, and preservation alternatives. | Planned: the priority gap (see Section 10.2). |
| Historic Sites Network | Manages the seventeen state-owned, partner-operated sites as one statewide network. | Partial: public directory live; partner-evidence workspace planned. |
| Grants & Reinvestment | Connects preservation needs to HPF grants, tax credits, and acquisition tools; routes to the TDEC grants system. | Partial: pathway navigator live; readiness layer planned. |
| Local Preservation Capacity | Supports Certified Local Governments, ordinances, design guidance, and survey planning. | Partial: capacity surfaces planned. |
| Marker & Memory | Modernizes the marker program; connects markers to stories, condition, reporting, and education. | Built: marker proposal workflow and condition reporting. |
| Public Interpretation & Education | Turns professional records and community knowledge into responsible public meaning. | Built: county stories, trails, and education hub. |
| Partnership & Intake | One doorway for citizens, owners, professionals, partners, schools, and local governments. | Built: guided intake to admin review queue. |
| Reporting & Accountability | Connects activity to mandate, plan goals, board oversight, districts, audits, and public outcomes. | Partial: public dashboard live; full reporting planned. |
5.4 Design principles
Mission before software. Every feature maps to a statutory duty, a federal responsibility, a plan objective, an audit need, a public-service task, or a measurable outcome.
Integrate before replacing. Current formal portals stay authoritative until leadership deliberately changes them.
Distributed ownership. Shared standards do not erase expert authority. Programs keep their own workloads and legal processes.
One lens, many programs. County is the common lens, not the only structure.
One record, many uses. Update once; the page, brief, dashboard, report, and partner task follow.
Provenance everywhere. Every record shows source, authority, verification, steward, last review, and restrictions.
Tiered access by design. Public discovery, professional research, partner work, staff workflow, and restricted data require different permissions.
Non-negotiable foundations. Accessibility, records, security, and disaster recovery are architectural requirements, designed in from the start.
Human judgment in the loop. AI and automation may assist search, drafting, and routing; they never make official preservation decisions.
State ownership and portability. Data, taxonomies, documents, and audit logs must survive any vendor or platform change.
5.5 Why this can become a leading state model
| State / system | What it proves | What Tennessee adopts |
|---|---|---|
| Pennsylvania, PA-SHARE | SHPO workflow and GIS can be streamlined without making all data public. | Integrated project workflow with tiered user access. |
| Virginia, VCRIS | A large inventory with paid professional access and protected archaeology. | Explicit user tiers and sensitive-data controls. |
| Texas, Historic Sites Atlas | Broad public discovery across markers, the Register, cemeteries, and sites. | County-searchable public discovery, with public and restricted clearly separated. |
| Tennessee, Heritage OS | A small expert agency, 95 counties, partner-run sites, and a public-history mission. | Statutory operations, partner evidence, county service, storytelling, education, and reporting in one model. |
6. 95 to 1: The First Campaign Inside the OS
County-by-county public proof of a larger statewide operating model.
95 to 1 is not the operating system. It is the first campaign that makes the operating system visible: 95 counties, one connected Commission, and a repeatable county service package.
6.1 Campaign purpose
Make THC's statewide responsibility visible in every county, not only where a site, nomination, grant, or review is most active.
Give each county a consistent doorway into THC programs, records, education, assistance, and opportunities.
Create a measurable rollout leadership can explain to commissioners, legislators, county officials, schools, and the public.
Test the shared data, workflow, content, partner, and reporting model before expanding to other campaigns.
6.2 The standard county service package
| Component | What it contains |
|---|---|
| County overview | Why the county matters; grand division; communities; heritage themes; current service status. |
| Official resource snapshot | National Register entries; survey status; markers; state sites; public cemetery information. |
| Program connections | Links into the National Register, survey, Section 106, CLG assistance, grants, tax credits, markers, cemeteries, sites, and the Wars Commission. |
| Preservation opportunity | Survey gaps, grant-readiness, threatened resources, public-use buildings, reuse and education potential. |
| Local partner network | County and municipal contacts, CLGs, historical organizations, schools, libraries, tourism, archives, site partners. |
| Public interpretation | A flagship county story, places, people, themes, photographs, marker connections, and source notes. |
| Education resource | At least one local classroom activity tied to verified resources and primary-source questions. |
| Guided intake | Submit a story, place, marker condition, document, cemetery concern, assistance request, or program question. |
| Downloadable brief | An accessible county summary for officials, educators, partners, commissioners, and legislators. |
| Internal operating record | Owners, status, submissions, review queue, program activity, data gaps, next actions, metrics. |
6.3 Campaign statuses
Baseline → Collecting → In program review → County review → Published → Refresh due. The status is shown on the public county map, so the rollout is legible at a glance and honest about what is and is not yet verified.
6.4 Future campaigns on the same operating system
Marker to Meaning: Connects markers to stories, condition, QR experiences, thematic trails, and classrooms.
Preservation Builds Communities: Grants, tax credits, reuse, tourism, public buildings, jobs, and local investment.
Tennessee Classrooms, Tennessee Stories: County-based teacher resources, primary sources, site visits, and student participation.
Sites of Statehood: One public network for state historic sites and partner-operated programs.
Tennessee at Risk: Responsible, tiered identification of threatened resources and action pathways.
The 50-Year Horizon: Ongoing survey planning for properties reaching the historic-age threshold.
Common Ground: Inclusive public-history work connecting local memory, civic identity, and difficult history.
7. People, Ownership, and Governance
Strengthen the current titles and expertise. Do not force a disruptive reorganization.
7.1 Role alignment with the present staff model
Heritage OS gives each program leader a clear stake and a clear view, while authoritative decisions stay exactly where the law and professional standards place them.
| Role family | Heritage OS responsibility | Primary view |
|---|---|---|
| Executive Director / SHPO | Executive sponsor; priorities; board relationship; budget; external accountability. | Portfolio dashboard, decision log, plan outcomes, statewide reports. |
| Deputy SHPO / Federal Programs | Operating product owner for integration, the plan, HPF, and cross-program standards. | Roadmap, governance, data standards, federal compliance, plan measures. |
| Tax Credits / Development Grants | Reinvestment and technical-preservation workflow owner. | Pipeline, technical guidance, investment outcomes, handoffs. |
| Section 106 staff | Federal review and consultation owners. | e106 context, deadlines, public guidance, restricted case links. |
| Survey & GIS | Enterprise cultural-resource data steward and geospatial authority. | Resource identity, maps, coverage and freshness, sensitive-geospatial rules. |
| National Register | Listing and nomination content authorities. | County listing views, nomination pipeline, Review Board materials. |
| CLG / Technical Preservation | Local implementation network and technical-assistance owners. | County contacts, capacity assessment, requests, training, progress. |
| State Historic Sites | Portfolio and partner-operations owners. | Partner obligations, inspections, maintenance, capital work, outcomes. |
| THPA / Outreach / Markers | Public intake, communication, markers, and outreach owner. | Intake triage, marker condition and content, campaign calendar, routing. |
| Cemetery Program | Register, assistance, advisory committee, privacy, and reporting owner. | Generalized public map, restricted detail, intake, committee records. |
| Wars Commission | Military heritage, grants, easements, and interpretation owner. | Thematic resource layer, grant and easement outcomes, protected acreage. |
| Administration | Records, finance, procurement, user administration, audit support. | Document control, retention, permissions, financial evidence, audit packages. |
| TDEC / STS / records / legal | Enterprise architecture, hosting, security, procurement, records, legal, accessibility. | Approvals, risk controls, integrations, standards, testing, operations. |
7.2 Governance without a new silo
| Body | Membership | Accountability |
|---|---|---|
| Executive Sponsor | Executive Director / SHPO. | Outcome, priorities, board and administration alignment, cross-program decisions. |
| Operating Product Owner | A designated senior staff leader. | Backlog, process standards, adoption, release decisions. |
| Product Council | Program leads across survey/GIS, NR, Section 106, grants, CLG, sites, markers, cemetery, Wars, administration. | Monthly cross-program decisions; resolves data, workflow, and public-language conflicts. |
| Data Governance Group | Survey/GIS lead, program stewards, records, security, accessibility. | Canonical identifiers, provenance, sensitivity, retention, data quality, exports. |
| Delivery Team | Product/project manager, UX/content/accessibility, engineering, GIS/data, testing/training. | Builds and operates the service under state standards. |
| Local Partner Network | CLGs, county and municipal officials, site partners, historical groups, schools. | Supplies local knowledge, reviews public facts, receives assistance, documents outcomes. |
| Board Oversight | The Commission and relevant committees. | Approves direction, reviews results and risks, uses dashboards rather than replacing staff management. |
7.3 The one capability that is currently missing
A dedicated Digital Product Owner should ultimately own the cross-program service. It can begin as a time-limited contract or assigned role during the demonstration. The job is not to make preservation decisions. It is to convert staff expertise into shared workflows, accessible public services, integrations, measures, training, and continuous improvement. Without a named owner, the platform becomes a website project that launches and then drifts away from the work. The owner must have enough authority to convene programs, manage vendors, enforce common standards, and report to executive leadership.
8. Technical Blueprint
A hybrid integration architecture. Current systems stay authoritative; Heritage OS is the coordination layer.
8.1 Architecture principles
State-enterprise alignment. Involve TDEC and STS architecture, security, procurement, and operations from discovery through production.
Open interchange. Stable identifiers, documented APIs, scheduled extracts, and exportable open formats wherever appropriate.
Authoritative-source discipline. Each field and document has a system of record, a steward, a source date, and a synchronization rule.
Separate public and restricted services. Public discovery never implies access to sensitive archaeology, exact cemetery coordinates, protected-property detail, or confidential submissions.
Accessibility by design. WCAG 2.1 AA across web, forms, dashboards, documents, media, and generated reports. Accessible templates are mandatory.
Records by design. Every record class maps to an approved retention path, legal-hold process, and preservation export.
Security and privacy by design. Least privilege, MFA/SSO, audit logs, encryption, data classification, vendor risk, incident response, disaster recovery.
Human-controlled AI. Only approved use cases, approved tools, classified-data controls, transparency, and review. No official determinations by automation.
8.2 Systems of record and the Heritage OS relationship
This table is the operational version of the boundary in Section 1.3. It names who owns truth and what Heritage OS adds without duplicating authority.
| System | Authority | Heritage OS relationship |
|---|---|---|
| e106 / ServiceNow | System of record for Section 106 transactions. | Route users correctly; surface approved status and context; cross-link counties and resources. Never duplicate the official response. |
| Survey123 / ArcGIS / THC Viewer | Authoritative geospatial and survey sources. | Use shared identifiers and approved extracts; provide county coverage and freshness; respect restrictions. |
| TDEC Grants Management System | System of record for grant transactions. | Provide readiness, guidance, deadlines, referrals, partner history, and outcomes; deep-link to apply. |
| TN.gov platform | Official agency publishing channel. | Use approved integration or subdomain; never become an unofficial competing source. |
| NPS / NARA National Register | Federal authoritative record. | Link and synchronize approved metadata; distinguish Tennessee workflow from final federal action. |
| Partner site systems | Local operational source by agreement. | Define minimum shared data and reporting; do not centralize every site business system. |
| Heritage OS | Source of truth for its own cross-program objects. | Maintain authoritative-source links, not copy-and-forget records. |
8.3 Core data model
A small set of shared objects, each carrying provenance and sensitivity. The deployed demonstration implements this model directly.
| Object | Shape (selected fields) |
|---|---|
| County | Name, identifiers, grand division, districts, service status, denormalized counts, last review. |
| Historic resource | Canonical ID, type, generalized location, descriptions, source, survey and NR status, sensitivity, themes. |
| State historic site | Property, buildings, partner, agreement, inspection, maintenance, capital, disaster plan, public use. |
| Organization / partner | Type, geography, contacts, agreement, roles, capacity, submissions, assistance, outcomes. |
| Submission / request | Submitter, permissions, county and resource, type, files, routing, status, owner, response. |
| Story / interpretation | Title, audience, body, sources, rights, themes, program connections, review, publication. |
| Education resource | Audience and grade, standards, county and resource, activity, format, accessibility. |
| Preservation opportunity | Need, urgency, readiness, technical assistance, funding pathway, next action. |
| Document / media | File, format, rights, accessibility, source, retention class, sensitivity, checksum. |
| Metric / outcome | Definition, source, period, geography, target, actual, evidence, public or internal. |
8.4 Mandatory metadata on every material record
Canonical ID and type · system of record and source link · authority level (official THC, federal, partner-submitted, public-submitted, staff draft, derived) · verification status and steward · sensitivity (public, generalized public, partner, staff, confidential, restricted cultural resource) · geography · created / modified / synchronized / last-reviewed dates · records class and legal-hold status · accessibility status · rights and consent · change history.
8.5 Access tiers
| Tier | What they see |
|---|---|
| Public | Verified public records, generalized maps, county pages, stories, guidance, accessible downloads. |
| Contributor | Submit and manage own materials; see routing and communication; no authority over official status. |
| County / CLG / partner | Approved local workspace, assistance requests, partner obligations, draft review, local metrics. |
| Qualified professional / agency | Approved research and project context; controlled by role, need, and program rules. |
| THC staff | Program workflow, shared records, assignments, reporting, content review, cross-program context. |
| Restricted staff / legal / archaeology | Sensitive locations, confidential submissions, legal records, protected-property data. |
| Commission / oversight | Dashboards, packets, decision materials, risks, and outcomes appropriate to legal role. |
8.6 Technology direction
The deployed demonstration runs on a Cloudflare-native, TypeScript stack: TanStack Start on Cloudflare Workers, a D1 database, R2 object storage, Drizzle and Zod for schema-driven contracts, and MapLibre with first-party map tiles. It imports real records directly from the Commission's published ArcGIS services, host-restricted to tn.gov, with idempotent loads.
For production, the recommended direction is a hybrid: an official TN.gov presence, a state-approved modular service and workflow layer, the existing authoritative portals untouched, one common data and index layer, and open APIs and exports. Any production choice must pass STS architecture, security, procurement, records, and continuity review. The demonstration stack is deliberately portable so that components can be replaced if production adopts state-enterprise platforms.
8.7 AI: useful, bounded, and reviewable
Tennessee's enterprise AI policy applies to boards and commissions and requires governance and data-classification controls; sensitive state data is never entered into public AI systems. Heritage OS treats AI as an optional assistive service, never a decision-maker.
Appropriate uses: semantic search over approved public content, metadata suggestions, duplicate detection, OCR in approved environments, draft summaries, plain-language drafts, report assembly, and intake-classification suggestions.
Requires human approval: publication, resource status, legal or regulatory conclusions, grant eligibility, historical interpretation, accessibility remediation, and records disposition.
Prohibited: automatic eligibility or Section 106 determinations, exposing sensitive data, unreviewed generated history, training public models on restricted submissions, and opaque scoring that affects access or funding.
8.8 Nonfunctional requirements
Accessibility: WCAG 2.1 AA, with VPAT/ACR expectations for vendors. Security: state data classification, least privilege, MFA/SSO, encryption, logging, third-party risk, incident response. Privacy: exact archaeology and cemetery data restricted; personal information minimized; consent managed. Records: approved retention and disposition authorities, versioning, legal holds, export packages, no vendor-only formats. Reliability: monitoring, backups, tested disaster recovery, documented RPO/RTO. Performance: mobile-first, low-bandwidth, optimized maps and media. Interoperability: stable IDs, API and export specifications, common vocabularies.
9. The 90-Day Working Demonstration
Show the complete future in miniature before asking anyone to approve the complete build.
Much of this demonstration already exists and is deployed. The 90-day plan below hardens it, adds the one missing engine, selects the final five counties with leadership, and produces the decision package.
9.1 Objective
In five minutes, leadership should see how the Commission's mission, staff, programs, systems, sites, counties, partners, and public value become one coherent operating model, real enough to click, search, submit, route, update, and generate a brief, without trying to automate every formal process or load every sensitive record.
9.2 Deliverables
| # | Deliverable | Status |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | A future THC front door with a service finder and program map. | Deployed |
| 2 | The Heritage OS operating view: the engines and the service cycle. | Partial |
| 3 | The statewide 95-county map with status and service indicators. | Deployed |
| 4 | Five county service pages with resource snapshot, partner network, story, education, opportunity, and brief. | Deployed (county set to finalize) |
| 5 | A guided public intake that routes submissions to a controlled queue. | Deployed |
| 6 | A staff operating dashboard by county, program, owner, due date, source, sensitivity, status. | Partial |
| 7 | A historic-site partner view with obligations, inspection, maintenance, plan, and public-benefit evidence. | Planned |
| 8 | A searchable resource and marker view with official/source status and public-vs-restricted behavior. | Deployed |
| 9 | A Section 106 / review-and-protection context surface that routes to e106. | Planned (priority) |
| 10 | The implementation package: validated requirements, integration map, governance, roadmap, risks, recommendation. | To produce |
9.3 County selection
Five counties should show geographic, demographic, institutional, and program diversity. Strong archetypes: an East Tennessee statehood anchor (Sullivan, with Rocky Mount), the state-capital urban county (Davidson), a West Tennessee urban county (Shelby), a rural courthouse / Main Street county, and a smaller underrepresented county. Final selection rests with leadership based on priorities, local willingness, data readiness, and program mix.
9.4 The 30-60-90 plan
| Window | Focus | Work |
|---|---|---|
| Days 1–30 | Discover and define | Confirm sponsor and product owner; staff interviews; current-system and data inventory; user journeys; legal, security, records, and accessibility review; finalize counties; success measures. |
| Days 31–60 | Build and validate | Harden the front door, map, county template, intake, and dashboard; build the Section 106 / review surface; add the site-partner sample; first integrations or approved extracts; accessibility testing; staff review. |
| Days 61–90 | Prove and decide | Finalize five county packages and briefs; demo script; user testing; revised governance and requirements; cost and effort ranges; production-architecture decision; board and leadership presentation. |
9.5 Demonstration team
A product/project lead (full-time for 90 days); a UX/content/accessibility lead (half to full time); a full-stack/integration engineer (full-time); a GIS/data engineer (quarter to half time); THC program experts (two to four hours per week per participating program, concentrated at review points); and TDEC, STS, legal, records, and security partners at scheduled checkpoints.
9.6 Acceptance criteria
A first-time public user finds the right program or next action without knowing program terminology.
A staff user opens one county and sees verified cross-program context without changing any authoritative decision.
Every visible record shows source, status, last review, and limitations.
Sensitive records are excluded, generalized, or restricted by role.
A single update appears in at least three outputs, for example a county page, a dashboard, and a brief.
The tested experience meets WCAG 2.1 AA and produces an accessible sample brief.
Staff can explain which current systems stay authoritative and what Heritage OS adds.
Leadership receives a credible production recommendation, not merely a polished prototype.
9.7 The five-minute sequence
Open the front door and show the connected mission. Choose a county and open its service page. Move from the county story to official resources, programs, assistance, and opportunities. Submit a marker condition report through guided intake. Switch to the staff workspace and show routing, provenance, sensitivity, ownership, and next action. Open the site-partner view and the Section 106 context surface. Generate the county and legislative brief. Return to the statewide map to show how 95 to 1 proves a larger system.
10. Roadmap, Delivery, and Dependencies
Build the service in phases, with governance and adoption ahead of scale.
10.1 Phased program
| Phase | Scope | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 0, Demonstration | Vision, requirements, five counties, shared model, intake, dashboard, site sample, Section 106 surface, briefs, architecture decision. | A decision to proceed and an approved production path. Largely deployed. |
| 1, Front door + baseline | All 95 county skeletons; program finder; official links; accessible intake; five to fifteen complete county packages. | Visible statewide presence and a repeatable publishing and service model. |
| 2, Workflow + integrations | Role-based workspace; ArcGIS, e106, grants, and TN.gov integrations; assignments; provenance; dashboards. | Less duplication, better routing, consistent status, measurable workload. |
| 3, Sites, partners, grants, capacity | Partner portal; inspections; maintenance; disaster plans; CLG assistance; grant-readiness and outcomes. | Stronger asset and partner controls and local-service delivery. |
| 4, Statewide intelligence | Search; public atlas; district reports; plan measures; open-data exports; approved AI assistance. | A mature statewide heritage service and accountability platform. |
| 5, Continuous campaigns | Marker to Meaning, Preservation Builds Communities, classrooms, threatened resources, the 50-year horizon. | The operating system becomes the permanent platform for future strategy. |
10.2 Priority gap to close first
The single most important addition is the Review & Protection engine, a Section 106 and state-property context surface. It is a core statutory function (§ 4-11-111 and the NHPA) with no current representation in the demonstration. The right build is small and on-brand: a plain-language explanation of the process, the county and National Register context a consultant needs before filing (drawn from data already imported), and a deep link to the real e106 portal for the actual submission. It does not rebuild e106. It routes to it and adds the context the current site lacks.
10.3 Dependencies
THC leadership and board: Sponsor, priorities, authority, adoption, reporting expectations, policy decisions.
TDEC administration: Legal, procurement, finance, internal audit, public web, communications, administrative attachment.
STS: Architecture review, security, identity, hosting, integrations, AI policy, disaster recovery, vendor risk.
State Library and Archives: Records disposition authorities, electronic-records design, permanent records, archival transfer.
State GIS / ArcGIS: Survey and Viewer integrations, map services, sensitive-resource controls.
National Park Service: HPF allowability, SHPO requirements, National Register, planning, and reporting rules.
Local and site partners: County facts, public review, partner obligations, local capacity, adoption.
10.4 Funding and procurement
Fund the demonstration as a short strategic and technical discovery effort. Assemble production funding around the components being delivered, not a vague heritage website, state operating or modernization funds, program-eligible HPF components, site and asset-management appropriations, education and interpretation grants, and campaign-specific philanthropy. Confirm eligibility and match before committing any source.
Procurement must require state ownership of data, schemas, content, and logs; complete exports in non-proprietary formats and exit assistance; API and integration rights without punitive fees; accessibility-conformance evidence; state security, privacy, AI, and records requirements; clear service levels; knowledge transfer; and performance-based acceptance tied to user journeys and data quality, not merely software installation.
10.5 Principal risks and mitigations
| Risk | Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Scope becomes everything THC does on day one. | Start with a demonstration and a thin common layer; phase program depth. |
| Staff perceive replacement or centralization. | Keep program ownership explicit; co-design workflows; preserve systems of record; measure staff time saved. |
| Public submissions create legal or factual confusion. | Authority and status labels, disclaimers, professional review, sensitivity screening, no auto-publication. |
| Sensitive resources are exposed. | Tiered access, generalized location, classification, qualified access, logging, security review. |
| Data quality is inconsistent. | Canonical IDs, provenance, steward ownership, validation, review dates, completeness indicators. |
| The platform launches but content goes stale. | A named product owner and stewards; review cadences; alerts; freshness metrics; generated outputs. |
| Vendor lock-in. | Open APIs and exports, state-owned schemas and content, termination assistance, modular architecture. |
| Accessibility remediation overwhelms. | Accessible templates first; inventory and prioritize legacy files; track remediation status. |
| Technology approval comes too late. | TDEC and STS in the first 30 days; architecture and security checkpoints before production commitments. |
| A new system adds work. | Automate synchronization and reporting; remove duplicate forms; measure handoffs before and after. |
11. Measures and Decision Package
The operating system proves the Commission by showing service, stewardship, investment, and public benefit.
11.1 The performance framework
| Outcome family | Illustrative measures |
|---|---|
| Statewide coverage | Counties at each service status; program and partner coverage by county. |
| Resource knowledge | Survey coverage and freshness; records with complete provenance; geographic and thematic gaps. |
| Public service | Intake volume; correct routing; response time; users reaching the right program; repeat questions reduced. |
| Review and protection | State-property and federal-review workload and timeliness; threats and alternatives documented. |
| Historic sites | Current agreements, inspections, maintenance, capital milestones, disaster plans, public-benefit measures. |
| Funding and reinvestment | Grant-ready projects; applications and awards; match; tax-credit investment; projects completed. |
| Local capacity | CLGs supported; planning tools; trainings; survey projects; new or strengthened local programs. |
| Markers and cemeteries | Condition reports, repairs, additions, verified records, committee obligations, privacy compliance. |
| Education and interpretation | County stories, Courier pipeline, lesson resources, downloads, inclusive thematic representation. |
| Governance and compliance | Accessible documents; records mapped to retention authorities; overdue obligations; audit evidence. |
11.2 What leadership should authorize
Adopt Tennessee Heritage OS as a working concept for discovery and demonstration, not yet as a production platform or official brand.
Name an executive sponsor and an operating product owner.
Authorize a 90-day cross-program working demonstration with five counties and one historic-site partner view.
Direct early coordination with TDEC, STS, records management, legal, accessibility, GIS, and current platform owners.
Approve a small Product Council drawn from existing program titles and administrative staff.
Approve the core boundaries: current authoritative systems remain; public submissions do not create official status; sensitive data stays protected.
Require the demonstration to return with validated needs, production options, integration requirements, resource estimates, risk controls, and a phased decision package.
Use 95 to 1 as the first public proof campaign within the larger operating system.
11.3 The first ten actions
Confirm the sponsor, product owner, and working team.
Hold structured interviews with each program and administrative function.
Inventory current portals, forms, data stores, reports, partner obligations, and recurring manual work.
Map ten priority user journeys and the handoffs between programs.
Finalize five demonstration counties and one historic-site partner record.
Approve the shared source, status, and sensitivity vocabulary (Appendix B).
Confirm the county service template and internal county record.
Build the Section 106 / review-and-protection context surface, the priority gap.
Conduct accessibility, security, records, and architecture review during design, not at the end.
Present the working demonstration with a production recommendation and measurable benefits.
11.4 Final statement
The Commission already has the mandate. Tennessee Heritage OS gives it the system. 95 to 1 gives the public proof. The most important outcome is not a new website but an institution that can see its statewide responsibilities as one portfolio, serve people through one understandable front door, preserve expert authority, coordinate partners, protect sensitive resources, document decisions, publish responsibly, teach Tennessee history, connect preservation to investment, and prove public value county by county.
Appendix A. Heritage OS Fit by Staff Role Family
Heritage OS responsibilities attach to role families, not to named individuals, so the model survives staffing changes. Validate the current roster and titles before any formal use.
The role-to-responsibility-to-view mapping is in Section 7.1. The principle: every program leader gains a clear stake and a clear view, while authoritative decisions stay where the law and professional standards place them. The one new function the current structure lacks is a dedicated Digital Product Owner (Section 7.3).
Appendix B. Shared Status, Authority, and Sensitivity Vocabulary
One controlled vocabulary, used on every record across every program. The deployed demonstration already enforces these as enums.
Authority level
| Level | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Official THC record | Approved or maintained by the responsible program or authorized body. |
| Federal authoritative record | Maintained by NPS, NARA, ACHP, or another federal authority; linked or synchronized. |
| Partner submitted | Provided by an approved partner; pending or subject to validation. |
| Public submitted | Community information, observation, story, or request; not an official finding. |
| Staff draft / working | Internal analysis, draft content, or pre-decisional workflow. |
| Derived / reporting | Calculated or assembled from other authoritative records for dashboards and reports. |
Workflow status
Received · Screening · Program review · Needs documentation · Referred to authoritative process · Approved / verified · Published · Closed / no action · Restricted · Refresh due.
Sensitivity
| Level | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Public | Approved for unrestricted public access. |
| Public, generalized | Visible only at county, vicinity, or reduced precision. |
| Contributor / partner | Visible to the submitter or an approved partner workspace. |
| Staff internal | Visible to authorized state staff for operations. |
| Confidential | Protected by law, policy, agreement, privacy, or program rule. |
| Restricted cultural resource | Archaeological, cemetery, sacred, or vulnerable location requiring special authorization. |
Appendix C. One-Page Leadership Brief
The issue
THC holds broad statewide authority and strong expert programs, but the public and leadership experience those responsibilities through separate program pages, portals, records, partners, and reports. The Commission has no single county-centered, task-centered view of the whole mission.
The proposal
Tennessee Heritage OS: a shared service, workflow, data, partner, public-access, and reporting layer that connects current programs and systems without replacing their legal authority or specialized processes.
The first proof
95 to 1: a five-county demonstration of the standard county service package, then statewide rollout across all 95 counties. A working version is already deployed.
The ask
Authorize a 90-day working demonstration; name an executive sponsor and product owner; convene a cross-program Product Council; involve TDEC, STS, records, and accessibility from day one; return with a production decision package.
What the demonstration must prove
A public user can begin with a place or question and reach the right THC service.
Staff can see county and cross-program context while authoritative systems stay authoritative.
A shared record can power public, staff, board, and legislative outputs without duplicate work.
Sensitive resources, official determinations, accessibility, records, security, and partner obligations are controlled by design.
The Commission can report its statewide mission through measurable service in every county.
Appendix D. Sources and Research Notes
Primary sources reviewed for this blueprint, accessed June 2026.
THC website and program pages: About Us; Staff; Federal Programs (National Register, Section 106, preservation grants, historic tax credits, local-government assistance, survey); State Programs (state historic sites, historical markers, cemetery preservation, Wars Commission, land-acquisition grants); The Courier; board and public-meeting pages.
THC public data services: the Historical Commission ArcGIS Viewer (tnmap.tn.gov), the cemetery register and map, and the state-historic-sites and National Register datasets, the same services the deployed demonstration imports from.
Tennessee statutes, Title 4, Chapter 11 (§§ 4-11-103, 104, 106, 107, 108, 109, 111).
National Park Service, State Historic Preservation Office program.
Tennessee Comptroller, Tennessee Historical Commission Performance Audit, December 2024.
State of Tennessee, Strategic Technology Solutions information-resource policies; State Library and Archives records-management advisories; ADA digital-accessibility initiative (WCAG 2.1 AA).
Comparable state systems: Pennsylvania PA-SHARE; Virginia VCRIS; Texas Historic Sites Atlas, design patterns, not procurement recommendations.
Research cautions
Program counts, leadership, staff assignments, board membership, deadlines, site portfolios, and links change. Revalidate before each formal presentation.
The 2024 performance audit describes conditions and management responses at that time. Use it as a design input, not as a claim that every condition remains unresolved.
Statutory text must be verified against the official Tennessee Code before any formal legal action.
Comparable state systems demonstrate design patterns, not one-to-one operational equivalence.