North American Serials Interest Group June 3, 2011 David C. Fowler.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Managing Access and Purchase. Objectives Examine issues of sustainability, costs and resourcing Examine consortia building issues Evaluate possible consortia.
Advertisements

University Library W(h)ither the big deal Is e-journal purchase about to fragment? Martin Gill Faculty Team Leader Arts and Social Sciences Faculty Team.
VIVA’s View of the Big Deal, Cost Sharing, and Cooperative Collection Management; Why sometimes having just one key is not enough. Museum of Innocence:
Differing Models of Collaborative Entrepreneurship at the UNCG Libraries.
IMPACT OF JOURNAL CANCELLATIONS ON INTERLIBRARY LOAN DEMAND Rachel Fleming, Serials Librarian, Western Carolina University Kristin Calvert, Electronic.
Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009.
“ W HEN THE G OING G ETS T OUGH, THE T OUGH R ENEGOTIATE THEIR C ONSORTIAL J OURNAL D EALS ” Emma Cryer, Duke Medical Center Library Christie Degener,
Beth Bernhardt Assistant Dean for Collection Management and Scholarly Communications UNC Greensboro Pay Per View or Déjà vu.
Swets Blackwell Consortia and Multiple Site Services for E-Journals Acquisitions Working with Libraries and Publishers.
Global Economic Crisis: Impact on Academic Libraries Greg Anderson.
The Impact of Consortial Purchasing on Library Acquisitions: the Turkish Experience Tuba Akbaytürk 24 th Annual IATUL Conference Ankara, Turkey.
Kresge Library Key to a University of Distinction.
Facing the Serials Crisis Changing budget allocations in a time of uncertainty Larry Schmidt University of Wyoming ASEE Annual Conference 2004 Session.
UCSF Library and The Center for Knowledge Management November 2005 THE COST OF SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION Karen Butter University Librarian Presentation to.
Shifting Approaches to Collection Development: Should We Bother Selecting Journals at All? David F. Kohl Dean and University Librarian University of Cincinnati,
Kevin Engel, Rebecca Stuhr, Cecilia Knight Grinnell College Libraries March 18, 2011, ILA-ACRL Annual Spring Conference On Being Essential Making Connections.
Jill Emery, Head of Acquisitions The University of Austin & In absentia: Dana Walker, Head of Acquisitions University of Georgia Libraries Anti-Acquisitions.
1 Spain (CBUC) Country report 10th SELL Meeting Bordeaux, June 11 th 2010.
E-journals: opportunities and challenges Bharati Banerjee.
Journal Sales Channels With the advent of the internet and online journals, the international library market has increased in complexity and opportunity.
USING COST-PER-USE TO ASSESS BIG DEALS Tim Bucknall (UNCG)
Online Books and Reference Works from Wiley-Blackwell Alina Przydańska
Evaluating and Purchasing Electronic Resources- The University of Pittsburgh Experience Sarah Aerni Special Projects Librarian University of Pittsburgh.
Library Materials Budget Allocation by Lois Schultz February 23, 2005.
Collections Support at UMKC Libraries Faculty Library Advisory Committee October 15, 2013.
9/7/2015Division of Undergraduate Education Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (S-STEM) Program Bert Holmes
Rich Foley - Executive Vice President Academic & Public Markets Helen Wilbur - Vice President Consortia Sales & Marketing Digital ArchivesResearch CollectionseBooks.
Measurement of use and impact of electronic information services Dr Angela Conyers Evidence Base Birmingham City University
FY 2006 Budget Process W. Frank Steely Library Arne J. Almquist, Assoc. Provost for Library Services.
User-Centered Collection Development: Purchase On-Demand ebook patron-driven selection at UNCG Christine Fischer Head of Acquisitions/ University Libraries.
Dave Fowler, May 4,  36 member libraries in Oregon, Washington and now, Idaho serving 225,000 students.  Cooperative licensing of databases and.
Greetings From Ohio 1. E-W 360 km N-S 370 km 106,765 sq km 35 th in US Pop: 11.5 M 7 th in US GDP: $373 Billion lowest pt.132 m highest pt. 473 m Greetings.
The Big Deal…A Good Deal! eICOLC October 3-5, 2002 Thessaloniki, Greece David F. Kohl.
The changing paradigm: ScienceDirect usage of non-subscribed journal articles Chris Kluiters Managing Director Elsevier Science Asia Pacific
1 CONCERT 2004 Power to the Librarian Delivering Transparency in the Serials Market Doug McMillan Managing Director Bowker UK Ltd.
Experiences on the Ground: usage stats as a practical tool in the Library Jill Taylor-Roe Newcastle University Library UKSG Usage Statistics Training Seminar.
1 Canadian National Site Licensing Project ICOLC 9, Newport, April 24, 2001 Canadian National Site Licensing Project (CNSLP) Project Update Deb deBruijn.
In the Beginning… There was Interlibrary Loan! 20 Years of Making the Virtual a Reality ILL Community Forum July 11, 2014 Kathy Perry VIVA Director.
The International e-Depot to Guarantee Permanent Access to Scholarly Publications Marcel Ras Tartu, June 2012.
Usage versus Cost Analytics for Selection Management and Informed Purchase Decisions MTA Budapest, October 2012.
PaperStats from Pubget: A Consortial Usage Stats Service Rick Burke, SCELC ALCTS New Orleans, LA June 25, 2011.
The University of Oregon Serials Cancellation Project Collection Evaluation During the Economic Crisis: Case Studies in Academia David C. Fowler,
Pay Per View: A Library’s Perspective Beth R. Bernhardt Electronic Journals/Document Delivery Librarian University of North Carolina at Greensboro NC Serials.
OhioLINK – Reluctant but Successful – depending on your definition Orderly Retreat (Reduction) from the Electronic Journal Big Deal ICOLC Meeting Philadelphia,
OhioLINK viewpoint: Consortium Electronic Book Licenses – it’s Just a Serial Common Licensing Expectations and Techniques for E-Book Publishers or E-book.
NCSU Libraries Collections Budget Presentation University Library Committee November 6, 2014 Greg Raschke Associate Director for Collections and Scholarly.
Jonathan Nabe Southern Illinois University Carbondale NASIG Annual Conference June 3, 2011.
Overview for Faculty. How We Got Here Inflationary Pressures (LJ, 2009 & Ebsco) % increase since 2005 by discipline: 31-58% 2010 annual inflation estimate.
Idan Hadari | Alma Product Management Choice and Diversity in Acquisition Models.
Wiley-Blackwell: Update for the Consortium Community Reed Elfenbein, VP/Director of Global Sales and Marketing Christopher McKenzie, VP/Director of Institutional.
Budget Overview Committee on the Library January 2014.
A Leap in the Dark A Pilot Project for an Electronic-Only Engineering Collection Laurel Kristick and Margaret Mellinger Oregon State University Libraries.
Jodi Upton USA TODAY Associated Press Sports Editors Salt Lake City June 24, 2010.
RCM BUDGET REVIEW George A. Smathers Libraries Judith C. Russell March 26,
Journal of Phycology Patricia A. Wheeler, Editor ( )
Winter Symposium January 20, Why are we here today? To discuss ways that we can take control of our future and make the outcomes we desire more.
Journey to Publisher PDA Janis Tyhurst Senior Science Subject Specialist and Business Librarian.
1 Serials Collections Analysis for Libraries and Consortia Presentation to ICOLC Jim McGinty CEO.
Beth Bernhardt Electronic Resources Librarian / UNC Greensboro Pay Per View ALCTS Collection Management Forum Déjà vu I know I’ve been here before!
PDA Profile Optimization at Liberty University Erin Crane, Ebooks Librarian Lori Snyder, E-Resource Cataloging Librarian
University of Regina Library Acquisitions Budget Challenges Colleen Murphy, Acting University Librarian Barbara Nelke, Head Library Technical Services.
Providing and Maintaining Access to Electronic Serials —from Consortium and Member University Library’s perspectives NASIG 31st Annual Conference June.
Leaving the Big Deal: Revisiting the University of Oregon Experience
Information Resources Strategy: Continuing to Provide the Resources You Need Fall 2016.
Negotiate Resource Pricing Using Data Visualization
Financial Planning Management
Leaving the Big Deal: Consequences and Next Steps
How can EBSCO help in the collection of resource usage data for CAUL?
Lenny Rhine, Cecilia Botero, Michele R. Tennant and Steven Carrico
Task Force on Environmental transfers of the Working Group on
Presentation transcript:

North American Serials Interest Group June 3, 2011 David C. Fowler

 Founded in 1876, the University has 263 academic programs and another 33 research centers and institutes.  2010/11 FTE enrollment is 23,389; 19,534 undergraduate students and 3,885 graduate and doctoral students.  Student body comes from all 50 states, and 85 foreign countries.  Division I athletic programs in 9 men’s and 10 women’s sports.

 Consists of Knight Library, Jacqua Law Library. Science Library, AAA Library and Portland Library and Learning Commons.  74 faculty, 85 classified staff, 58 student workers.  3,138,936 books and serials.  4,198,103 microforms.  783,154 maps.  1,327,009 slides and photos.

 291,531 electronic books.  74,487 current serials.  2,468,633 full-text downloads.  361,809 circulations of physical items.  Total budget of $20,042,433.  Materials budget of $6,427,158.  Member of Greater Western Library Alliance (GWLA) and the Orbis-Cascade Alliance.

 UO was hit, like most schools, by the big economic downturn…

 University of Oregon has historically been neither a very rich or very poor public university.  Oregon ranks 43 rd in the amount of state spending per student at public universities.  Over the years it has, by necessity, weaned itself off public funding.  The State of Oregon now provides less than 10% of UO’s funding.

 Due to the economic downturn and other budgetary pressures, the UO took a 20% cut in state funding in that biennium.  The University recently raised tuition by 7.5% to help bridge the gap in It is going up another 6% in  The University Foundation has worked to raise $853,000,000 in new donations and pledges to help bolster its endowment in the last two years.

 Similar cuts to what the University absorbed impacted the library initially.  Dating back to the last serials cancellation project in , the library worked to eliminate as much format duplication as possible.  However, serials inflation was gradually catching up with the savings previously achieved, as illustrated here:

 Journal prices inflate, on average, between 8 and 10 percent each year.  If we didn’t reduce the materials budget, our ability to purchase other collection items would be compromised.

 Eliminate any remaining format duplication in titles.  Target high-cost/low-use titles.  And crucially: Some of our “Big Deal” deals would have to be broken…

 Using 360 Counter, we took the 2007 and 2008 journal cost and usage statistics and determined the cost-per-use (CPU), and then ranked them overall and within their aggregator. This information was provided to subject specialists to help guide their de- selection decisions.

 First, Pay-per-view access to Science Direct was rising at an unsustainable rate, and it was decided to cut this service.  The UO Collection Manager’s Group began meeting with their Oregon State University counterparts to look at general ways to collaborate on collection development in the future.  The biggest success from this effort was collaboration on a shared Elsevier collection deal.  Portland State University was later added to this particular initiative.

 The previously-existing Elsevier deal covered the entire Orbis-Cascade Alliance (36 schools), not just UO, OSU and PSU.  Of the 3 schools in the new deal: OSU: 55% of dollars spent UO: 25% PSU: 20%  UO required ~$58,000 in cuts.

 As soon as our intentions were made known, Elsevier asked for separate meetings with the 3 schools’ leadership.  We made it clear we would only meet together.  We initially needed a combined cancellation of 18% across all 3 schools.  Elsevier wanted us to hold cuts to 10%  We negotiated a reduced content fee, which enabled us to reduce cancellations to 14%.

 Elsevier had presented a formal content fee offer of 25%  However, all 3 schools recorded a verbal 12.5% content fee offer from them.  OSU and PSU needed to be released from their current contracts as well.  UO was using a 1-year interim contract.  These terms did not include Cell Press titles.

 Elsevier then countered with two options:  A) 10% cuts,10% content fee, a UTL and sharing of titles; or:  B) 14% cuts,12.5% content fee, a UTL and no sharing of each other’s titles.  First option was rejected; We countered with full sharing for Option B and a 3 years of 0% increases.  Our counter was accepted except for the inflation request. (0%/2%/5%)

 Schools opted for a 2-year deal.  We are reaching the end of the first-post-Big Deal deal.  Negotiations have re-started with Elsevier.  A brief attempt to re-offer the Freedom Collection was aborted by Elsevier.  Hoping to have a 3-5 year deal in place by summer’s end.  No major title adjustments.  Holds inflation to very reasonable levels.

 At UO ( not inc. Cell Press & Law School):  2009 (before cuts): $406,  2010 (after cuts, year 1: $361, (-11%)  2011 (after cuts, year 2): $372,  2012 (projected): $387,  2013 (projected): $403,  2014 (projected): $419,  2015 (projected): $444,414.00

 While ILL/DD requests have risen dramatically, Elsevier title ILLs have only risen modestly.  Pre-selection of titles based on best cost-per- use seemed to mitigate most customer dissatisfaction.  No significant student concerns.  A moderate amount of faculty concern, due to the loss of certain STM titles, especially in Chemistry and Physics.  Considering a library-run PPV option for certain science disciplines, but may be some obstacles.

 Access to ~1,000 titles via the Greater Western Library Alliance.  Shared access to the majority via our GWLA partners.  Blackwell titles not yet fully integrated into Wiley, so two title lists to account for.  Many direct-from-Wiley titles.  The rest were split between EBSCO and Harrassowitz.

 Made 96 cancellations, worth $166,103 in initial cancellations.  Also, temporarily cancelled all other Wiley and Blackwell titles in  Re-ordered those desired/affordable in 2010: 278 titles, worth $353,513.  Several UO-OSU “shared titles” held by OSU, that we had to reinstate for UO.  Loss of 534 consortial titles from GWLA partners.

 Mini-deal with OSU considered.  Collection managers pretty battle-scared after long Elsevier analysis and re- negotiation.  It was determined that not enough time and energy remained to put together a second mini-deal.  Requested and received a single-institution “enhanced access license.”

 297 subscribed titles (+ 28 “comes with” titles).  Currently pay $380, for subscribed titles. (2011 “Core Collection” price + Anthrosource).  862 post-cancellation access titles, old title changes or freebies.  For P/C titles, access generally stops in Jan 2010.

 Blackwell titles integrated, as of January  Continue to find vendor transfers to/from Wiley.  In 2011, 4 transfers in (+$13,621).  In 2011, 4 transfers out (-$1,619.25).  Also seem to locate 1-2 print Wiley imprint titles annually that had previously been missed, which are added as e-titles.

 At UO (not including Anthrosource):  2009 (before cuts): $519, (approx)  2010 (after cuts, year 1): $351,  2011 (after cuts, year 2): $379,  2012: ?

 UO is generally happy with the results of the Wiley Big Deal cancellation.  We have adequate access to our highest-use titles.  Uptick in ILL/DD of these titles has been minimal due to the time spent at the front- end pre-selecting the titles that made the most financial sense.

 No blowback or noticeable complaints from faculty or students.  In retrospect, a non-event from the patron point-of-view.  We continue to do annual contracts with Wiley for subscribed titles only, and do not anticipate that changing.

 We have maintained electronic access to our most-used titles, while shedding many high- cost, low-use titles.  We have a sustainable materials budget for the next few years.  Better than expected library income and some augments enabled us to indefinitely postpone the Year 2 serials cancellation.

 There is recognition that we, as a library, and as larger community cannot continue to business as usual.  Another cancellation project will be inevitable.

Thank you. Questions? David C. Fowler University of Oregon