1. There’s a policy for that? RESULTS FROM AN INFORMAL SURVEY OF IR PRACTICES Christy Shorey - University of Florida

2. Why do a policy review? IR@UF created in 2006 Shift in staffing Shift in focus of IR@UF Increasingly specific questions from users in areas with no policies in place IR landscape has changed over a decade

3. How do we identify what we don’t know? Start with the questions we were getting from users Review the literature to get ideas on key policy areas o Documentation for Institutional Repositories – Probets and Jenkins o Starting, Strengthening, and Managing Institutional Repositories – Nabe Look at upcoming projects and long-term goals o Inheriting honors theses o Support symposiums and conferences How do I…? Is it possible to…?

4. How do we get the information? Formulate questions Identify peer institutions (25) Review websites of the target institutions to get initial feel for policies Contact target institutions via email for questions where < 5 addressed policy on website 15 out of 25 replied Create multiple choice questions based on common answers Send survey invite to target institutions 15 out of 26* replied for a 58% return rate *Transcription error from initial list lead to extra institution being included in the survey

5. The Institutional Repository Policy Survey Focused on 4 key policy areas for IRs Administration Submission Collections Other Policies ◦Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETDs) ◦Duplicates ◦Removal of items ◦Related items ◦Supplemental materials

6. Basic Demographics Institution Name Your Role at Institution (title) Do you have an Institutional Repository (IR) at your Institution? What platform / technology do you use for your IR? For the purposes of this survey, an Institutional Repository (IR) is defined as a set of services offered by the institution to the members of its community for the management, dissemination and preservation of digital materials created by the institution and its community members.

7. What platform/ technology do you use for your IR? * “Other” replies were mostly Fedora-based solutions

8. Administration Which department administers the IR? Which entity set initial policies when your IR was established? Individual Department Advisory / Steering Committee Is the IR policy upkeep/ revision handled by the same entity? If not, who is in charge of policy upkeep/ revision? Who acts in the role of curator/ gatekeeper for materials going into the IR?

9. Administration Which department administers the IR? ◦100% are administered by the library ◦14/15 sole responsibility with library Which entity set initial policies when your IR was established? ◦ 53% by a steering committee ◦Mostly multiple units in library, with some outside participation ◦Metadata/cataloging ◦Archives ◦Digital Scholarship / Digital Collections ◦Subject Specialists ◦Preservation Who acts in the role of gatekeeper for materials going into the IR? o 47% had no gatekeeper (approved individuals can submit anything into IR) o 60% the gatekeeper was Repository Curator or IR Manager o Central IT o Faculty o Centers/ Partners Gatekeeper : an individual, or group of individuals, who can approve or deny the addition of materials into the IR.

10. Submission Policies How are materials identified/ collected for inclusion in the IR? Who can contribute materials to the IR? What types of materials are housed in your IR? Does inclusion of materials in the IR fall under an institutional policy or mandate? Are there any fees associated with posting any of the material to the IR? What type of standards do you have for submission to the IR? How do you handle submission of works with multiple authors?

11. Submission Policies How are materials identified/ collected for inclusion in the IR? ◦Individual submission (aka self deposit) ◦Mediated/ Assisted submission via community administrator ◦Mediated/ Assisted submission via library ◦Harvested by IR staff ◦CV Review ◦Vendor / Publisher contributed ◦Other (please explain) ◦Most had 3(+) means for collecting materials ◦93% accepted individual submissions ◦2 institutions (13%) rely only on individual submission

12. Submission Policies Who can contribute materials to the IR? “Other” responses include: ◦Center and program affiliates ◦Participants in institution sponsored events ◦US government and state officials ◦Non-affiliated individuals, with and institutional sponsor

13. Submission Policies What types of content are housed in your IR? 100% of respondents house: A majority of respondents (67-93%) house: “Other” responses include: Pre-print articles Post-Print articles Technical reports Conference papers Data sets ETDs Digitized theses and/or dissertations Conference proceedings Book chapters Working papers Conference posters Supplementary materials for ETDs and articles Videos 3D files Comics Presentation slides Finding aids Survey instruments Special collections Podcasts Long-form blog articles Maps

14. Submission Policies Does inclusion of materials in the IR fall under an institutional policy or mandate? ◦54% have an Open Access policy ◦23% have mandates specifically for ETDs What type of standards do you have for submission to the IR? ◦93% Copyright permission / grant of permission ◦80% Basic metadata requirements ◦73% Appropriateness for collection / follows guidelines ◦47% Work complete/ ready to distribute ◦47% Standards set by and enforced at community / department level How do you handle submission of works with multiple authors? ◦100% - Any one of the authors, as copyright holder, may submit item to the IR

15. Collection Policies Does the IR act as the digital University Archive? Does the IR house departmental and/or institutional materials? What distinct sub-collections are contained in your IR? Does your IR act as a platform for institutional publications / journals?

16. Collection Policies Does the IR act as the digital University Archive? ◦60% of respondents indicate they are separate entities What distinct sub-collections are contained in your IR? ◦100% - Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETDs) ◦ 80% - Department collections ◦ 60% - Community based collections ◦ 60% - Data sets ◦ 53% - Individual faculty / researcher works ◦ 47% - Conference proceedings Does your IR act as a platform for institutional journals? ◦40% - For archive issues only ◦27% - No ◦20% - Yes, including providing publishing tools

17. Other IR Policies What metadata is available for items in your IR, and how is collected / assigned? Under what circumstances may items be removed from the IR? Is material ever checked for duplicates? How are duplicate records handled?

18. Other IR Policies - continued What happens when a newer or edited version of title already in IR is submitted? When materials have been vetted through a different academic entity prior to submission, does that impact policies such as acceptance, making changes, take-down requests? Who generates the metadata for ETDs? How do you handle supplemental materials for ETDs?

19. What metadata is available for items in your IR, and how is it collected / assigned? Provided 6 options for how metadata was collected ◦Provided by submitter – Required ◦Provided by submitter – Preferred/ strongly encouraged ◦Provided by submitter – Optional ◦Assigned by system ◦Added by staff ◦System does not support / no place to collect

21. Metadata Overview Provided by Submitter - Required ◦Author ◦Title ◦Date ◦Rights Provided by Submitter – Optional ◦Abstract ◦Publisher ◦Publication Status ◦Sponsors/ Funding ◦Subject Keywords ◦Language ◦Other Version Assigned by Staff ◦URL to related items ◦Contributors ◦Rights Assigned by system ◦Abstract Fair Mix ◦Citation ◦Discipline ◦Contributors ◦Type/ Format Don’t Support ◦Peer review ◦Comments

22. Other IR Policies How do you handle items that are related? ◦73% Include links to related items in metadata ◦67% Create collections/ series for related items ◦53% Related items included under same departmental collections Under what circumstances may items be removed from the IR? ◦100% Copyright infringement ◦ 93% Plagiarism ◦ 87% Author Request ◦ 80% Library / University discretion ◦ 60% Journal publisher’s request ◦ 53% Violation of IR policy Two institutions note that they withdraw/embargo items (make inaccessible) rather than delete the records

23. Next Steps For UF: Analyze results to articulate best practices of our peer institutions Compare best practices to current IR@UF policies to identify discrepancies and gaps Draft suggested policy revisions, send to library administration For the survey: Modify some of the questions based on feedback Send to broader community Share results with broader community

24. Contact and Resources Christy Shorey Manager of the UF Institutional Repository & Theses and Dissertations Program chrshor@uflib.ufl.edu Documentation for Institutional Repositories by Steve Probets and Celia Jenkins, 2006 https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/782 Starting, Strengthening, and Managing Institutional Repositories by Jonathan A. Nabe, 2010 New York, NY: Neal-Schuman Publishers http://www.alastore.ala.org/pdf/0393-starting--strengthening-and-managing-institutional- repositories.pdfhttp://www.alastore.ala.org/pdf/0393-starting--strengthening-and-managing-institutional- repositories.pdf Institutional Repository Policy Survey http://ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00039807/00001

25. Review of IR Policy Parameters in the Literature Documentation for Institutional Repositories – Probets and Jenkins Policy documentation should cover the following issues: Overview of the IR/advocacy materials Collections policy Metadata Intellectual Property Rights and copyright Submission/deposit procedures Details of submission workflows Step-by-step instructions Preservation policy User policy Starting, Strengthening, and Managing Institutional Repositories - Nabe Minimal Policies for an IR Establishing communities and collections Administering the IR communities Contributors Content types, file formats, and versioning Use of content Submission Agreements Submission Process Withdrawal and Retention Preservation Efforts Additional considered: Fees for Space; Commercial Uses; Privacy: Quality Control