Supports UK academic libraries by providing a single point of access to e-journal usage data Assists management of e-journals collections, evaluation and decision- making Provides statistics to ensure the best deals for the academic community

143 UK libraries in JUSP All UK higher education institutions are welcome to participate uk/participants.html

21 publishers AAAS AIP Annual Reviews BioOne BMJ Brill CUP EUP Elsevier Emerald Future Medicine IOP Publishing IOS Press Nature Publishing Group Oxford University Press Project MUSE Royal Society of Chemistry SAGE Springer Taylor & Francis Wiley-Blackwell 3 intermediaries Ebsco EJS Publishing Technology (ingentaconnect) Swets

Access to the JUSP portal Ability to engage in evidence-based discussions with customers about usage and value for money Recognition from libraries of your customer service credentials in supporting an initiative like JUSP Ensuring customers have a complete record of usage including usage through intermediaries

COUNTER usage reports JR1 Journal Report 1: Number of Successful Full-Text Article Requests by Month and Journal JR1a Journal Report 1a: Number of Successful Full-Text Article Requests from an Archive by Month and Journal / /

Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative (SUSHI) M2M way of gathering statistics Replaces the user- mediated collection of usage reports SUSHI server to gather data from JUSP

COUNTER compliance Data is checked at point of aggregation Restated data (from publishers) can be addressed globally Data anomalies referred back to publishers to be corrected at source

“We like the fact that with JUSP you know the data is proactively being checked and verified.” University of Birmingham

JUSP report typeJUSP report title Journal level reports JR1 and JR1A reports JR1 reports inc gateways and intermediaries JR1 reports excluding backfile usage Summary reports SCONUL return Summary of publisher usage Summary use of gateway and host intermediaries Summary use of backfiles Tables and graphs Which titles have highest use Number of titles and requests in usage ranges Experimental reports Titles included in deals (year/multiple years) Compare deals NESLi2 deals Titles vs NESLi2 deals Individual journal search and usage Breakdown of publisher usage (title and year)(title and date range)

How much are the subscribed titles being used? How much are other titles in the deal being used? Does usage show that the deal offers better value than individual subscribed titles?

Accounting for nil usage Does the JR1 report contain titles that are not available in the collection the library subscribes to? Does the JR1 report contain titles that are no longer part of the current deal e.g. name changes, publisher changes?

Publisher X JR1 for 2011 for a library with the Basic Research Collection– 59% of titles in the JR1 are not in the library’s deal and will show nil use. Titles in the Premium Collection in the JR1498 Titles in the Basic Research Collection206 Titles in the JR1 not available to the Library292

Community resource responding to what people want Working closely with libraries to understand how JUSP is being used and how it can help decision-making Information sharing and training events Developing new reports and features from user feedback Quick response rates encourage active user participation

Gathering feedback and monitoring use Surveys Visits Ongoing dialogue

"Evidence-based library decisions rely on the timely analysis of usage statistics. JUSP has quickly matured into a highly valued service largely due to the team's skill in solving problems and presenting complex data within a clear and well-structured user interface.” “The project has a real community feel to it, in that it actively responds to user input and I think it is a really good example of collaborative working - something we should be striving towards to avoid us needing to reinvent the wheel! I think the team has worked very well with libraries in seeking their input.” "The more publishers you can get on board the better! The JUSP portal is already proving to be invaluable to us."

“We are now able to provide better intelligence on collection use to subject librarians and we can do that quickly now rather than say “we haven’t got time” or “sorry or it’s too late” and it’s saving us the possibility of renewing things that we shouldn’t.” Open University

“It has also helped us better understand the research profile of our institution which in turn informs decisions over resource allocation. For example, we may have a high profile academic who heavily used a particular resource but the resource had relatively low usage other than this user. If this academic leaves the institution the money for this could be better utilised elsewhere. The data we get from JUSP can help us identify the ever changing research profile of the institution.” Birkbeck, University of London

“Collating SCONUL stats in the past took several weeks to download data, put into spreadsheets, and collate (sometimes had to request data and wait for it to be done by publisher as not all publishers are instantly presenting their statistics). I would estimate a saving of a third of the time it previously took as approximately a third of our journals for the SCONUL return are in JUSP.” University of Leicester

“Having this information both the qualitative and the quantitative allows us to make those decisions and react to what the university is doing around us and to the changing complex environment we have got.” University of Salford

Developing support materials Running training events Interoperability with other tools and services

Single point of access to data Automation provided by SUSHI offers time saving benefits Interoperability with other tools and services Report comparisons across publishers and years Flexible methods of viewing data through tables, charts or graphs Inclusion of intermediary stats Data checked and quality assured

Providing support and guidance to the community Knowledge sharing within the UK and with overseas consortia SUSHI client available as free, open source software Ongoing consultation with libraries and publishers