SCELC Shared Print for Monographs Bob Kieft Occidental College March 5, 2014

Shared Print? Roots in ILL and CCD But involves explicit commitments to  retention of specified materials for  a period of time under a  governance and policy regime Mutual dependence

Shared Print for SCELC? WEST involvement—2010+ Strategic plan (2012) calls for the consortium to develop shared print programs to:  Share books among member libraries (Camino)  Preserve copies  Identify unique copies, prevalent copies Libraries’ response to a new information and service environment Regional and national trend

Feasibility Study June 2013: SCELC Board authorizes feasibility study planning October 2013: Board approves two-phase study (planning, implementation) October 2013: working group forms; Lizanne Payne hired as consultant February 2014: phase one completed; Board approves phase two (ends in November 2014)

Goals of the Study Understand members’ readiness to participate in a shared print agreement for monographs Analyze composition and use of monograph collections to explore value of shared print Explore potential partnerships with other groups Develop proposals for establishing and addressing the sustainability of an agreement (biz and gov models)

And maybe….. Corollary studies: demand for books and use of monographs condition of books

Goal 1: Shared Print Survey Gather information about – Library identification and demographics – Library print collection size and plans – Consortium and shared print planning – Shared print goals Send to all SCELC members, UCs, CSUs, and Stanford

Topics Surveyed Importance of a shared print program? with SCELC members in collaboration with UC in collaboration with CSU Importance for reclaiming space or preserving the scholarly record? Focus on scarcely- or widely-held monographs? Importance of prospective collection development? Willingness to hold collections? Factors that would play the biggest role in willingness to participate?

Survey Responses – 56 SCELC members – 15 CSU libraries – 7 University of California libraries plus the California Digital Library and two Regional Library Facilities, for a total of ten UC responses – 1 non-affiliated library, Stanford University

Survey Results Highlights Importance of SCELC shared print program? 38/56 (68%) VI (13) or SI (25) within SCELC 37/56 (66%) VI (10) or SI (27) with UC 36/56 (64%) VI (7) or SI (29) with CSU Focus on rarely- or widely-held monographs? 36 (64%) “either or both” Importance of prospective collection dev? 44 (79%) VI (15) or SI (29) Willingness to hold collections? 40 (71%) potentially yes Willingness to participate? 39% “contents of the shared collection” as #1 23% “types and speed of access/delivery” as #1

Goal 2: Collection Analysis Identify cohort of 8-10 libraries Create and distribute RFI Select vendor Look at existing sources and analyses of data; decide data elements required, identify scarcely and widely held volumes, examine usage patterns Explore how SCELC data fits with data from other groups

Goal 3: Governance and Organization 1. Define how the shared print program would work, what services would be provided, and what commitments would be made  selection and content of collection  collection locations  validation (condition review)  access/delivery services offered  discoverability,  support for collection management

Goal 3: Governance and Organization 2. Define administration/funding after Phase 2  costs of operation to be covered; cost- sharing  terms of agreement  ongoing governance and mechanism for changes to the policies and agreements 3. Develop framework for an extensible program (policies, services, terms and conditions.)

And maybe…… Corollary studies Understand user behaviors with respect to print and electronic books Analyze costs of performing condition surveys for circulating materials

And your library? Collection analysis cohort? Additional libraries for policy and governance? Volunteers for working group?

Further Information Rick Burke Bob Kieft Karen Schneider