Viva usage statistics and counter 5 VIVA Collections Forum May 19, 2017 Anne Osterman, VIVA Director

Topics VIVA’s usage statistics program IMLS Grant for CC-PLUS Pilot with RedLink Library Dashboard COUNTER Release 5

The Goal of VIVA’s Usage Statistics Program Take all of the varied forms of data that come in from the vendors, distill them down to what VIVA actually subscribes to, and standardize them so that member libraries can navigate easily among the usage data.

Building a Sourcedata File Formulas populate the standardized institution name, type, and abbreviation (vertical lookup of a master file of all known variations of names and codes) Core variables are pulled from the vendor data into the sourcedata file: vendor’s name/code for each institution vendor name product or title platform metric type number of requests month of data Code Standardized Institution hampdensydney Hampden-Sydney C T27470 HSC Formulas and vertical look ups determine if each title is a VIVA title Title Collection A Brief History of the Philosophy of Time NOT VIVA A Concise Companion to the Jewish Religion Oxford Reference Online - Quick Reference A Confusion of the Spheres A Dictionary of Abbreviations

Sourcedata Example Product Vendor Platform Requests Report_Type Vendor_Inst Date Data_Type VIVA_Institution Inst_Type Inst_Abbrev FY Science AAAS Highwire Press 1 Consortium Report 1 (R4) 05647983 7/1/2014 ft_total Shenandoah U Private Nonprofit SU FY17 2 20288743 Marymount U MU 3 01970801 Ferrum C FC 20310683 Eastern Mennonite U EMU 01965727 Longwood U Public 4 Year LongU 04203445 Hampton U HU 20264816 Lynchburg C LyC

Summary Sheet/Pivot Table

VIVA Usage Statistics

In Practice Used during annual renewals How much has the resource been used and by which institutions? How has the usage changed over time? What is the cost per use compared to other similar resources? If it is a package, what proportion of titles received little or no usage?

In Practice Used during cancellation evaluation

In Practice Incorporated into Value Metric project Possible Score   Possible Score Score Given Notes & Calculations Rubric 1. Alignment with Curriculum and/or Accreditation Requirements Percentage of total use coming from single public highest-use institution 3 > 60% = 0 points 40-60% = 1 point 20-40% = 2 points < 20% = 3 points Percentage of total use coming from public highest-use institution type > 90% = 0 points 70-90%=1 point 50%-70% = 2 points < 50% = 3 points 2. Cost Effectiveness Cost per Use 6 >$4.00 = 0 $3.01-$4.00 = 1 $2.01-$3.00 = 2 $1.01-2.00 = 3 $0.51-1.00 = 4 $.26-$.50 = 5 <$0.25 = 6

IMLS Grant for CC-PLUS

CC-PLUS PALCI (lead requestor), VIVA, CDL, Jisc, Couperin, SCELC, CRKN, HKN, and USMAI have been awarded funding for a planning grant by the IMLS National Leadership Grant. The goal of the CC-PLUS (Consortia Collaborating on a Platform for Library Usage Statistics) project is to develop and test an open technology, proof of concept platform for the collection, display, and analysis of data about licensed electronic resources for consortia.  The project will adapt software developed by the Jisc consortium for their JUSP service to collaboratively address the challenges surrounding usage data for consortia. 

Pilot with RedLink Library Dashboard

Pilot with RedLink Library Dashboard RedLink is developing a group view of their Library Dashboard product, released for the first time this month. Library Dashboard is designed to streamline the collection and aggregation of multiple publisher usage reports and eliminate the need to import, standardize, and normalize data. RedLink pulls more data than VIVA does now and makes it easy to navigate the data and conduct high level assessment. VIVA will create a test implementation with shared resources usage from Virginia Tech, James Madison University, and Tidewater Community College.

Pilot with RedLink Library Dashboard Usage can be viewed by publication year.

Pilot with RedLink Library Dashboard Journal usage can be seen across providers.

Pilot with RedLink Library Dashboard It is easy to visualize the relative changes in usage.

Pilot with RedLink Library Dashboard Resources are mapped to subject areas.

COUNTER Release 5

COUNTER Release 5: Timeline Jan 2019 Sep – Dec 2016 Conceive Design Develop Jan- Apr 2017 Consult Check Discuss Apr – Jun 2017 Review Revise Improve Jul 2017 Post Publish Connect Jul 2017 – Dec 2018 Support Guide Encourage

COUNTER Release 5: Reports Platform Master Report Summarizes activity across a provider’s platform Database Master Report Details activity by database Title Master Report Details activity by title (journal, book, etc.) Item Master Report Details activity by item (article, chapter, media object, etc.) 36 reports in R4 were reduced to 4 Master reports in R5. Standard Views provide a set of pre-filtered views of the Master Reports covering the most common set of library needs.

COUNTER Release 5: Metric Types abstract no_license audio other data_set podcast ft_epub record_view ft_html reference ft_html_mobile result_click ft_pdf search_fed ft_pdf_mobile search_reg ft_ps sectioned_html ft_ps_mobile toc ft_total turnaway image video multimedia Release 5 total_item_investigations total_item_requests unique_item_investigations unique_item_requests unique_title_investigations unique_title_requests searches_regular searches_federated searches_automated searches_platform no_license limit_exceeded Item Database Platform Item 25 metric types in R4 reduced to 12 in R5. Format-specific metrics eliminated.

COUNTER Release 5: Metric Types total_item_investigations total_item_requests unique_item_investigations unique_item_requests unique_title_investigations unique_title_requests searches_regular searches_federated searches_automated searches_platform no_license limit_exceeded Investigations vs. Requests: User Action Item View abstract Link to Link Resolver View cited references Database Link to ILL form Investigations Platform View HTML full text We are introducing a new vocabulary as well since we need metric types to be format-agnostic – i.e. A video is not “text” so full text is not appropriate. “Investigations” is a superset metric in that it counts all activity a user has for an item where an item is the unit of content accessed – ie. Article, chapter, etc. Users viewing a detailed record, clicking an OpenURL link, viewing the full text, are all considered “investigations”… Another way of looking at it is that “investigations” are an overall measure of the user’s interest in a content item. Metrics include total item investigations… plus unique_item investigations in which an article or chapter can only get credit for one action in a user session; and, unique title investigations – which applies mostly to books – where the title, or book gets only credit for one unique_title_investigation in a user session… This resolves the incompatibility between book report 1 and book report 2 in that it no longer matters how the book is delivered. Requests Item View PDF View content… Link to Doc Delivery View article preview

COUNTER Release 5: Year of Publication YOP is the year of publication for the content item accessed. If content is available in print and online format and the publication dates of these two formats differ, the year of publication of the print will be used. Year of Publication yyyy 0001 (unknown) 9999 (articles in press)

Questions?