Coordinating Committees

Collections and Resource Sharing Coordinating Committee

Progress Report, January 30, 2009

Since my November report to CUWL, the Collections and Resource Coordinating Committee has held two monthly conference calls to discuss topics such as renewing the Emerald license (still being negotiated), a JAMA license for a subset of CUWL (didn’t materialize), and providing usage data for SEC-funded resources in advance of the Collection Development Committee’s (CDC) semiannual discussion by making the statistics available on the password-protected webspace of the CUWL wiki (under development). 

This quarterly report will focus on the status of two ongoing projects under CRS’ auspices:  Library Dynamics and the document delivery pilot.

Library Dynamics

The CUWL Library Dynamics Working Group was given two charges in March 2008. The first was to recommend expeditious and cost effective means of training for Library Dynamics (LD) across the state, particularly in the area of collection management. This was accomplished by 1) providing training to the CRSCC members, 2) presenting a product overview at the June 2008 UWS Library Conference, and 3) offering two training sessions for the CDC, including developing a training packet to supplement the LD user manual. 

The second charge was to develop benchmarks for our shared collection by 1) identifying areas of overlap and duplication, 2) posing questions that LD could answer for collection analysis, and 3) coordinating UWS collection purchasing decisions through the use of the primary book vendor.

The Working Group extensively reviewed the many functions of LD.  To provide a “big picture” summary of all LD reports, a spreadsheet was created to consolidate all UWS data totals by LC classification. Although not a capability of LD, this data compilation was done to more readily identify areas or trends for analysis. It clearly identifies patterns and provides answers to questions about highest use, greatest overlap, lowest use, etc.

To further the cooperative collection development goal, the committee utilized LD to analyze historical use in relation to the number of purchased copies systemwide in order to determine the optimal number of copies in a subject area.  

For an initial analysis, the LC classification, L (Education), was selected because it displays high annualized use in each campus group, i.e., Doctorals, Comprehensives and Colleges, low levels of percent zero use, and has relevancy to most campuses. Using the entire holdings of the UWS as the base collection for analysis, two subclasses, LB (Theory and Practice) and LC (Special Aspects, e.g., Special Education; Gifted and Talented), were selected. The number of titles held within the UWS and their base use for the time period 1999-2007 were compiled. Despite the fact that the LB’s and LC’s are high use areas, results indicated that three copies would have adequately met the usage demands in both areas. This initial analysis suggests that lower multiple copy numbers than are currently held could be purchased across the UWS. This reduction in duplication would free up funds among the campuses for other purchases not presently affordable. To test these initial findings further analysis will be conducted by the Working Group in other subject areas. 

LD provides a snapshot of UWS holdings and their use over an eight year period. It has the capability of identifying areas for analysis across the UWS, within library groups:  Doctorals, Comprehensives, and  Colleges, or among individual libraries. Annualized use per title and percent zero use are particularly helpful in identifying duplication levels and targets for weeding. With these areas identified, further analysis can be done on different time periods (LD data covers only publication dates 1999-2007) as campus needs dictate.  These data will be quite useful in identification of materials for a centralized storage facility. It can also be used to identify collection gaps among libraries, and cooperative collection building across the state or within the campus groups.

A brief survey of LD use was conducted among the UWS libraries in January 2009. Several campuses indicated that they have begun using LD on the local level in analysis of their own collections. If campuses share the types of projects being done locally, it will be beneficial to all UWS libraries and can be used as examples in further training. However, time constraints on several campuses have prevented implementation of projects and some have not identified a way to use LD. 


Document Delivery

Budget summary

1. Science Direct/Wiley/Procurement Cards
Budget:  $40,000 (carried over from FY08)
March – June 30, 2008 expenditures:  $6,106 
July 1 – December 31, 2008 expenditures:  $5,895
Balance:  $27,999

Science Direct and Wiley-Blackwell:  Average cost/week:  $109
Procurement card (P-card):  Average cost/week:  $320

2. BLDSC/CISTI
Budget:  $50,000
July 1 – December 31, 2008 expenditures:  $39,648
Balance:  $10,352

Additional Notes

  • $4,500 in electronic tokens was purchased from Wiley.  According to Wiley, all $4,500 was used by July 1, but no specific accounting was provided and the information that WiLS has collected from individual libraries appears to show fewer tokens used. WiLS is waiting for a full accounting before they buy more tokens.  
  • P-card activity grew more quickly than the use of ScienceDirect and Wiley-Blackwell services. A wide range of commercial resources are being used including Ingenta, Infotrieve, Informaworld, and Metapress. Average price per item is about $23.
  • After a somewhat slow start due to procedures/training related to P-Cards, campuses picked up on this service quickly (8 Comprehensives, 3 Colleges). Across all document delivery options including British Library and CISTI, all 4 year campuses and 5 of the colleges are participants.  
  • Does CUWL think data should be collected from the campuses on improvements in turn-around time and user satisfaction?

Submitted by Richard Reeb (Madison), CRSCC chair

Other CRS members are Ewa Barczyk (Milwaukee) Ron Hardy (Oshkosh), Karen Jander (Milwaukee), John Jax (La Crosse), Lisa Jewell (System), Dina Kaye (Parkside), Lee Konrad (Madison), Lisa Pillow (River Falls), Tom Reich (Stevens Point), Mary Rieder (Colleges), and Kathy Schneider (WiLS)