Philosophies Assumptions Objectives Barriers Motivations and Results Out of the Madness- Providing Adequately for Information Needs through a Consortium Philosophies Assumptions Objectives Barriers Motivations and Results Council of State Governments American Council on Education

MEMBERS State Library 38 private liberal arts colleges 23 public two-year colleges 2 standalone medical schools (7 total med) 2 private universities 13 public universities Includes 7 law +400,000 FTE 120 primary delivery sites

1987 Library Study Committee Report Three Major Results Creation of a Book Depository System for dense, off-site storage of library materials Mandate that “the State of Ohio Implement, as expeditiously as possible, a statewide electronic catalog system.” Appointment of a Steering Committee (consisting of librarians, faculty, administrators, and computer experts) to define the elements of such a system

This 1989 planning paper called for the Ohio program “to be the most powerful statewide library and information system in the nation.” Included in the vision were: Better access to and coordination in purchasing of our shared collections Expanded access to electronic information resources Improved access to information infrastructure The promotion of improved scholarly communications Improved and advantageous economies in the purchase and use of electronic information resources

Why as a Consortium? Most libraries DID NOT, DO NOT and WILL NOT have all the information resources their patrons need The use of information is highly ELASTIC based on EASE of access Past is a bad predictor of the future Current and future electronic information systems GREATLY ease access

Why as a Consortium? Realities of the current information marketplace User expectations are rising in the “information age”. If this IS a more information intensive age we need more information If this IS a more information intensive age we need to invest in more information But, it’s overpriced for a more information intensive age And It’s priced such that individual libraries cannot leverage significantly greater access on limited funds

Lately, More Motivation… The Internet dot.com world as library Portal-mania Web CT as library(e.g. Questia) E-book stores Publisher to end-user Text books as portals Who will decide library direction Statewide networking initiatives K-12 quality initiatives K-16 continuum initiatives Work force and economic development initiatives Distance learning initiatives

Community Colleges catalogs - average 44,000 bib records – 1200 added per year Liberal Arts Colleges catalogs – average 130,000 bib records – 2700 added per year

Our Objective Sustainable, increased student and faculty access to and use of library provided information to support and improve instruction and research…as a consortium

How to meet the Objective Get more information and get more information(value) for each $ spent by creating an environment of increased access Begin to gain control over costs. Stable and realistic economic equation between publishers and libraries (what $ are and will be available) Begin to know more about the new dynamics of information use in the electronic arena Minimize duplication in technology. Maximize services - integration and developments for all members

OhioLINK Program Philosophies User Empowerment rather than Mediation Abundant rather than Rationed Access Universal rather than Selective Access Immediate rather than Delayed Access Integrated rather than Segregated Access Leveraged Spending rather than Reduced or Less Efficient Spending Progressive, vested interest cooperation rather than parochial orientation

Barriers Underestimating Elasticity of Info Use Viewing Info Use and Info Economics as a Static Equation- as an End Game Selection over User-Driven models Politics of Money Lack of head-to-head competition Habitually bad buyers – now held hostage by our patrons Local mantra – “We’re different” Local versus group economic optimization Treating the consortium as a side-show Too many players/pseudo-consortia

So, what did we get to do the job? Why Central Funding?

OhioLINK Central Funding Capital –2 year budgets FYs 89-92 $9.2 million FYs 93-94 $10.8 million FYs 95-96 $6.8 million FYs 97-98 $5.0 million FYs 99-00 $6.3 million FYs 01-02 $7.5 million Operating – 2 year budgets FYs 90-91 $.4 million FYs 92-93 $1.7 million FYs 94-95 $4.4 million FYs 96-97 $8.8 million FYs 98-99 $11.5 million FYs 00-01 $14.6 million FYs 02-03 $18.7 million

Comparison of Annual Costs for Statewide Database Access Licensed Individually and Licensed through OhioLINK Some Illustrations of OhioLink Cost Savings Annual Reference and Research and Database Costs via OhioLink Group Licensing This bar graph illustrates the tremendous advantage of group licenses over comparable costs if libraries licensed the same resources individually. For the 5 databases noted, group licensing results in a 67% reduction over individual action. These types of savings or cost avoidance, ranging from 50-75% can be applied to all the reference and research databases licensed statewide by the program. Statewide licensing benefits colleges and universities of every size. As illustrated, the power to license for all of Ohio higher education provides greatly discounted rates and significantly stretches the dollar of individual library budgets. Large universities free up money to purchase more specialized resources, and small institutions now have access to resources formerly beyond their means.

Expanding cost-efficient access to information is OhioLINK’s mission Expanding cost-efficient access to information is OhioLINK’s mission. Increasingly, the budget is spent for content and the delivery of content. Initially, the budget focused on building a state-wide technology infrastructure. Now established, the infrastructure supports the ever-growing diversity of resources and services purchased by OhioLINK.

The local library expenditures and the OhioLINK expenditure together represent a very small fraction of Ohio’s overall higher education expenditures, yet the quality of every academic discipline’s instruction and research is directly affected by the quality of these resources. As we say in the States, OhioLINK provides a lot of “Bang for the Buck.”

25% Joint Tech. Planning Director Director - Library Systems OhioLINK Central staff Organizational Chart Governing Board Executive Director 25% Joint Tech. Planning Director As of 5/15/2000 Director - Library Systems Ast Dir Lib Sys Computing & Networking Ast Dir Lib Sys Database Management Ast Dir Lib Sys Mult Media Sys Ast Dir Lib Sys User Services Ast Dir Lib Sys Client/Server Applications Commun- ications Manager Office Manager Office Assistant 50% shared Systems Dev/Eng with OSC for DMC Systems Developer Sr. Systems Developer Systems Engineer Sr. Systems Engineer Systems Engineer 6.25 Librarians ---- 5.5 Technical ---- 4.0 Admin/Other

Governing Board -13 provosts OhioLINK Governance and Advisory Organization Governing Board -13 provosts Executive Director Central staff - 14.75 Technical Advisory Council Library Advisory Council User Advisory Council Cooperative Information Resources Management The Ohio Board of Regents authorized an OhioLINK Governing Board to oversee the OhioLINK program. The board approves the strategic directions and financial expenditures of the program. Meeting 6 times per year either in whole or through the board’s executive committee, the board regularly reviews the progress of the program and approves future initiatives and expenditures. The board consists of 13 voting members, who are provosts, nine from universities, 3 from community colleges, and one from independent colleges. Ex-officio members representing technical, library, and Board of Regents’ perspectives also participate on the board. The advisory groups noted on this slide represent OhkioLINK members at the grass-roots level and have been absolutely essential in both guiding OhioLINK’s policies and programs and in insuring buy-in and commitment for the policies and programs on the part of the membership. User Services Inter-Campus Services Database Management and Standards Lead Implementers

Results What have we done?

Regional Book Depositories Northeast 550,000 items stored Northwest 650,000 items stored Ohio State 1,100,000 items stored Southeast 350,000 items stored Southwest 1,000,000 items stored

EJC Publishers April 1998- Elsevier, Academic Press Feb 1999- MUSE Aug 1999- Kluwer, Springer-Verlag Sep 1999- Wiley, APS Apr 2000- MCB Press May 2000- RSC June 2000- IOP July 2000- ACS Sep 2000- AIP Currently- 3000+ ISSN’s; +2.0 million articles Next- Thieme, Blackwell Pub, CUP, others

May 99 – Apr 00

May 99 – Apr 00

OhioLINK: THE INFORMATION STRATEGY

CAT/REFERENCE/RESEARCH DATABASES SYSTEMS Electronic Journal Center 11 Pubs Proquest Global Rsch II DIGITAL-MEDIA CENTER Images, data, audio, video (library and 5 Com commercial) 9 Local Central Cat 73 + CRL DATAWARE 37 Journal Citation DB’s 11 Open Text tagged full text literature 3 ISI Web of Science 2 E-books netLibrary ITK 50 Web DB’s 23 vendor systems

DMC Commercial Sources Saskia +3000 art/architecture images AMICO 50,000 museum supplied art images; grows 20,000 per year Ohio Landsat 7 satellite images – new set every 16 days, 4 different views Ohio Sanborn maps 600 video physics demonstrations

CAT/REFERENCE/RESEARCH DATABASES SYSTEMS Electronic Journal Center 11 Pubs Proquest Global Rsch II DIGITAL-MEDIA CENTER Images, data, audio, video (library and 5 Com commercial) 9 Local Central Cat 73 + CRL DATAWARE 37 Journal Citation DB’s 11 Open Text tagged full text literature 3 ISI Web of Science 2 E-books netLibrary ITK 50 Web DB’s 23 vendor systems

CENTRAL-LOCAL CATALOG RESOURCE SHARING SYSTEM 1. SINGLE VENDOR 2. REAL TIME UPDATING 3. PATRON INITIATED NON-MEDIATED BORROWING 4. LOWER $$/Unit FILL 5. 50K TO +500K filled ILL’S PER YEAR 6. GROUP COLLECTION and CIRC DATA III LS III LS III LS III Central Catalog III LS III LS

CAT/REFERENCE/RESEARCH DATABASES SYSTEMS Electronic Journal Center 11 Pubs Proquest Global Rsch II DIGITAL-MEDIA CENTER Images, data, audio, video (library and 5 Com commercial) 9 Local Central Cat 73 + CRL DATAWARE 37 Journal Citation DB’s 11 Open Text tagged full text literature 3 ISI Web of Science 2 E-books netLibrary ITK 50 Web DB’s 23 vendor systems

CAT/REFERENCE/RESEARCH DATABASES SYSTEMS Electronic Journal Center 11 Pubs Proquest Global Rsch II DIGITAL-MEDIA CENTER Images, data, audio, video (library and 5 Com commercial) 9 Local Central Cat 73 + CRL DATAWARE 37 Journal Citation DB’s 11 Open Text tagged full text literature 3 ISI Web of Science 2 E-books netLibrary ITK 50 Web DB’s 23 vendor systems

CAT/REFERENCE/RESEARCH DATABASES SYSTEMS Electronic Journal Center 11 Pubs Proquest Global Rsch II DIGITAL-MEDIA CENTER Images, data, audio, video (library and 5 Com commercial) 9 Local Central Cat 73 + CRL DATAWARE 37 Journal Citation DB’s 11 Open Text tagged full text literature 3 ISI Web of Science 2 E-books netLibrary ITK 50 Web DB’s 23 vendor systems

Electronic Journal Center CAT/REFERENCE/RESEARCH DATABASES SYSTEMS Electronic Journal Center 11 Pubs Proquest Global Rsch II DIGITAL-MEDIA CENTER Images, data, audio, video (library and 5 Com commercial) 9 Local Central Cat 73 + CRL DATAWARE 37 Journal Citation DB’s 11 Open Text tagged full text literature 3 ISI Web of Science 2 E-books netLibrary ITK 50 Web DB’s 23 vendor systems

CAT/REFERENCE/RESEARCH DATABASES SYSTEMS Electronic Journal Center 11 Pubs Proquest Global Rsch II DIGITAL-MEDIA CENTER Images, data, audio, video (library and 5 Com commercial) 9 Local Central Cat 73 + CRL DATAWARE 37 Journal Citation DB’s 11 Open Text tagged full text literature 3 ISI Web of Science 2 E-books netLibrary ITK 50 Web DB’s 23 vendor systems

CAT/REFERENCE/RESEARCH DATABASES SYSTEMS Electronic Journal Center 11 Pubs Proquest Global Rsch II DIGITAL-MEDIA CENTER Images, data, audio, video (library and 5 Com commercial) 9 Local Central Cat 73 + CRL DATAWARE 37 Journal Citation DB’s 11 Open Text tagged full text literature 3 ISI Web of Science 2 E-books netLibrary ITK 50 Web DB’s 23 vendor systems

DMC Local Projects Akron Art Museum/ University of Akron - Selected Art Works Belmont Technical College - Historic Preservation Photos Bowling Green State University - Vessels of the Great Lakes - photos Oberlin College - Environmental Geology Images. Ohio5 - Foreign Language Videos Ohio University - Scripps Archive University of Cincinnati - Design, Art, Architecture, and Planning Library - architecture images Wright State University - Wright Brothers Archive Youngstown State University - Williamson (WKBN) Archive

extras

Membership 13 four-year public universities + 600,000 students + 400,000 FTE + 120 primary document delivery sites ______________________________________ 13 four-year public universities 2 four-year private research universities 2 public stand-alone medical colleges State Library of Ohio 23 two-year public community colleges 38 private liberal arts colleges

OhioLINK Academic User Community - Head Count Faculty 33,130 Undergraduate Students 437,253 Graduate Students 76,317 Staff 63,065

So, What Do We Need More access and use per $ spent More access and use for marginal players Costs that rise less than inflation and our budgets (Costs that don’t rise) Group costs that reflect the reality of the money that is available in the system Price structure based on electronic as primary delivery medium

Conclusions What we have had is not what we need The expansion in use can be dramatic Expansion/Integration of EJC, e-books, other e-resources will breed more use We must redefine the economic dynamics to allow EVOLVING SUSTAINED EXPANSION OF INFORMATION USE over rationing and forced selection Questions