UC Libraries Systemwide Collaborations Review of Initiatives Financial Implications Ginny Steel SLASIAC Meeting May 7, 2012

Current UC library collaborations Integrated services (Melvyl, NGTS) Shared facilities (NRLF, SRLF) Shared licensed collections Digital collections (OAC, Calisphere) Scholarly communication (eScholarship) Applied research and expertise (EAD, METS, HathiTrust)

New initiatives UC digital collection: digital asset management; discovery and display; aggregation; preservation; long-term curation, support, and management E-books Shelf-ready services “Good enough” record standard Elimination of backlogs in processing of archival and manuscript collections

New initiatives, continued Systemwide Collections Service Centers Transformed collection development practices Shared print in place

“Toward a financial model and process in support of UC library collaboration” (Proposal currently under consideration by CoUL.) To sustain ongoing services and long-term initiatives To enable the effective use of budgetary resources To ensure effective governance and organization

Funding issues No funding model for non-collection collaborations No identified discretionary funding for systemwide initiatives No process to transition from development/start-up to production Campus and UCOP financial systems not interoperable

Current Funding Models UC Systemwide or Multi-Campus Non- collections Initiatives Campus in-kind CDL in-kind Campus in-kind and CDL in-kind CDL funded Campus funded CDL and campus funded Grants

Current funding models, continued Centrally funded originally; funds transferred to campuses hosting service and now absorbed by campus (NRLF, SRLF) Vendor funded (mass digitization) Fee for service (EZID)

Options for future funding models Pro-rated campus/CDL shares based on size Annual “mixed” funding from campus/CDL annual contributions or Resource Sharing Fund Equal shares Hybrid cost shares using both funding and in-kind campus/CDL contributions Single campus, “mixed” or CDL funding for one- time start-up with ongoing annual costs shared

Options for funding models, continued One or several campuses invest one-time for systemwide benefit Grants/external funding CDL funds

Questions for discussion What systemwide initiatives are or would be beneficial enough to warrant additional central funding? In addition to measuring inputs and outputs, what metrics would be most useful as a basis for evaluating current and proposed systemwide services?