1. Alliance Ebook Update SCTS Day 2018 Andrea Eickholt Ebook Standing Group Chair
October 11, 2018

2. Alliance Ebook Program
38 Academic Libraries Participating for FY19
Launched July 2011 with EBL DDA for FY12 (ended Proquest DDA August 2017)
Currently: $1,011,000 budget for Ebooks – FY19 (est. 2% annual increases)
FY18 Portion of $1M budget
Alliance FY19 Ebook Program
Estimated Titles available (8Oct2018)
$285,000
Wiley UBCM (Usage Based Collection Management) Year 3 - April selection deadline
Alma NZ collection 20,295 = portfolios
(perpetual ownership: 536 titles selected year 1; 726 titles selected year 2)
200,000
OUP Year 2 - Outright purchase of publication year with free backfiles content available during year 1 & 2
Alma NZ collection 15,306 portfolios
Year 1: ~1,220 OUP & UC Press purchased titles.
Year 2: purchased ~1,500 OUP titles published June 2018-May 2019, + additional 350 titles from OUP partner presses
212,780
Proquest Subscription content - September renewal (3-year term)
Proquest Academic Complete subscription (comes with University Press Complete content) – IZ
N/A
Proquest DDA (Demand Driven Acquisition) - ended July 2017
Alma NZ collection 3,696= portfolio list as of 8Oct18
(DDA ended 2017)
$300,000
T&F EBS (Evidence Based Selection) –
Program Ended After Year 1: finalizing title selections
May 2018: Alma NZ collection 32,411. Perpetual access titles loaded into Alma/Primo once EBS title selections made. (estimating about 400 titles)

3. Highlights
Addition of Proquest University Press content to Academic Complete subscription
Updated Alliance Ebook webpages
Criteria of Successful **New** Ebook Programs document
Wiley UBCM Year 2 Title selections – April 2018
2 SCT-Reps Open Calls – May 2018
2 surveys to SCT-Reps – June and August 2018)
Completed first year of new OUP ebook program (outright purchase)
Continuing focus on integration with GOBI
Update from the Ebook Working Group (session 2)
Come hear about the status of the Alliance Ebook program for and highlights of what was accomplished by the Ebook Standing Group in There will also be time for questions and discussion with attendees.

4. Highlight: Wiley UBCM Year 2
UBCM (Usage Based Collection Management) Second Year commitment: $285, Period May 2017-April titles selected for Year 2.
Multipliers for selected titles based on title publication date
Frontlist (most recent 3 years – ): 4X list price
Backlist (pre-2016 for Year 2): 2X list price
Total Usage:19,936 unique titles used 378,917 times between May 2017-February 2018 by Alliance institutions. ($0.75/use; $14.30/title)
Wiley online book list price for 19,936 titles (no multiplier) = $3,296,964
Wiley titles selected by Alliance in Year 2:
23% frontlist / 77% backlist
More in Summary documents at Alliance Wiley UBCM page:

5. Highlight: Oxford University Press Year 1
Outright Purchase of Frontlist OUP and U of California Press content, gratis access to backfile content. $200, (Not evidence/usage based selection program)
Titles published June 2017-May 2018
1,224 titles received Year 1. 1,133 OUP titles, 91 UC Press titles. (~$163/title) Less than a 2X multiplier for Alliance purchased content – for unlimited users at 39 Alliance institutions!
Usage stats July 2017-June 2018 (missing December 2017):
78,374 chapter downloads/section requests across purchased and gratis content. (~$2.55/use considering commitment for year)
4,881 chapter downloads of purchased content. (~$41/use if looking only at usage of purchased content)
73,553 chapter downloads of gratis/backfile content
This program is different than others: Titles published throughout the year of purchase – some may only a couple months of potential usage; also need to consider impact of timeline to receive/load marc records into Primo with usage
78,374 chapter downloads/section requests across purchased and gratis content. 89% OUP/11% UC Press. (~$2.55/use considering commitment for year)

6. Taylor and Francis EBS Pilot: So many lessons learned..
$300,000 commitment. EBS Pilot Period July 1, 2017-June 30, X multiplier for selected titles.
8/31/17 – Alliance loaded records in Primo
10/4/17 – update on new T&F platform, old URLS, hope for new record load process using OCLC Worldshare coming
10/20/17 – new records loading workflow using OCLC Worldshare on weekend, also reminder on platform switch
10/24/17 – inaccessible titles – working with T&F to resolve
10/27/17 – addition of public note in Primo [some title may be temporarily unavailable]
10/31/17 – T&F extended redirect from old platform
November Alliance News – continuing to work with T&F to address access issues
11/15/17 – T&F continues to look at access issues (separately, proxy-related access issues at individual institutions and read vs download issues for certain titles)
12/15/17 – from Dana Bostrom to Council – ongoing issues with access
1/8/18 – removed “temporarily” from Primo public note
2/15/18 – reloading T&F records
2/20/18 – Download problem announcement – about 900 titles
4/5/18 – record load update at TS Open Call, GOBI trying to sync, DRM problem may be growing
May Alliance News – ESG and SCTS Team recommended discontinuing T&F EBS plan after year 1
May 2 Open Calls for SCT-Reps – working to investigate options to replace T&F EBS program
8/16/18 TS Open call – title selections made
8/31/18 – T&F EBS discovery pool titles being removed from collection
9/17/18 – T&F rerunning usage stats – no timeline available for new title selections
October 2018 – still trying to finalize title selections for perpetual access based on evidence/usage
Communicated as part of SCT-Reps Open Call May 2018, re: ending T&F EBS pilot in July 2018:
Inconsistent access to titles across Alliance members as well as lack of ability of T&F to meet expectations for consortia management of marc records (including poor quality records) in the network zone didn’t meet resulted in the ESG’s recommendation to end the T&F EBS pilot after year 1.
Additional factors:
Lack of consortia admin dashboard – no way to confirm holdings across all 39 members. Individual institution administration dashboards displayed varying title holdings across members of ESG for extended period of time.
Lack of clear understanding in titles included in the Alliance plan by T&F, T&F support unable to explain issues and fix access.
Unanticipated platform upgrade dramatically impacted response of T&F to issues.

7. June 2018 Survey to SCT-Reps
Questions 1 & 2 – respondent info

8. June 2018 Survey to SCT-Reps

9. June 2018 Survey to SCT-Reps
Summary of “Other”:
*EBSCO
*Sage or Elsevier
*NOT Elsevier
*No Preference (2)
*Multiple Content Providers, as long as DRM free
*Sage/Springer/Oxford
*Springer for STEM, or Sage
*LWW or Mosby
Q5 = distributor
17 = DRM-free mixed publishers via aggregator (e.g. EBSCO)
9 = DRM-free from a single publisher (e.g. Elsevier)

10. August 2018 Survey to SCT-Reps
Question on survey: Related to STEM content as part of the Alliance Ebook Program, please check as many boxes as applicable in regards to what components of STEM-related subjects are of interest to your institution:
24 SCT-Reps from the 38 participating Alliance members responded

11. August 2018 Survey to SCT-Reps
Question 2:   Oxford University Press has presented add-on purchase options for FY18-9 for the following partner presses on the University Press Scholarship Online platform …offered at a very attractive, low multiplier for the Orbis Cascade Alliance.  Please check as many boxes as applicable in regards to Oxford partner presses that would be of interest to your institution, if purchased through the Alliance ebook program:

12. 2018-9: Where we are going
Wiley UBCM (Usage Based Collection Management) – Year 3
Titles selected for perpetual ownership: Year 1 (536 titles selected); Year 2 (727)
20,000+ titles in discovery pool
OUP Year 2 – Continuing purchase of OUP content + Frontlist purchase of UC Press, U of Chicago, Princeton and MIT Press titles. Gratis access for one more year of OUP backlist content. Gratis access to backlist content may not be offered for year 3..
Proquest Ebook Central Academic Complete – subscription continues
Replacement for T&F component – Ebook Standing Group continuing to investigate options (focusing on STEM content)

13. Summer 2018 – Reviewed proposals to replace T&F program
EBSCO – full proposal not provided - communicating that EBSCO can facilitate consortial access for Unlimited User DRM-free ebooks
Elsevier – 4X or 3X multiplier (depending on content/offer)
Springer - $150-$600/title (depending on 2018 subject sets)
Sage EBA – 10X multiplier
Cambridge – 4X or 5X multiplier (depending on content/offer)
OUP Year 2 – less than 2X multiplier for front list purchases
Elsevier – heard clear feedback against working with Elsevier; proposal more complicated than others – unclear how selecting content would result in final pricing
Cambridge – wanted to focus on STEM content as replacement for T&F
Sage – same as Cambridge, older content (only 6% of content publication dates )
Additional content purchased from OUP ($70K) – recognizing very very low multiplier (1.75 for partner presses, 1.6 for OUP)
Confidential

14. Things to think about..
Ongoing Consortial Management – problems, records, data collection, data sharing, communication
Even legacy programs – like Proquest DDA or ended programs like T&F (collecting usage stats) continue to grow the responsibilities of the ESG
Expectations for Vendor – Centralized Management and Dashboard – using the Alliance Criteria document going forward
Balancing needs of diverse group of users with own individual approach to ebooks (including individual order history)
Volunteer driven – how do we ensure we maintain capacity
Knowledge transfer – volunteer driven
Difference in programs – post purchase vs pre-purchases – impact on stats, measuring, comparing success
At this time: Very focused on current programs. Going forward: what about past programs (especially OUP where usage will grow over time)
Multipliers – with the variety of programs to date, starting to get our own set of expectations
Timing – everything at once vs everything spread out – no perfect model – especially when volunteer supported
Leverage from having such a large program has benefited the Alliance to be at the forefront in trying new things, getting great deals (including advantageous pricing)
Market influence – vendors want to work with us, especially when looking to spend $200,000+/year

15. Springer Ebook proposal 2018-9 looking for feedback
Updated offer (based on ESG feedback on available funds and desire for broader STEM content)
Members want more STEM subjects, to meet diverse needs but within the amount of money available ($225k).
Biomedical/Life Sciences, Chemistry/Materials Science, Computer Science, Math/Stats, and Physics/Astronomy. [Based on internal Alliance survey]
Instead of full subject purchase selections, Orbis would purchase select book-types from the five subject collections of interest:
For $225k, Orbis members would receive ownership over all Textbooks (undergraduate and graduate), Handbooks, Professional Books, and Teachers Manuals in the areas of Biomedical/Life Sciences, Chemistry/Materials Science, Computer Science, Math/Stats, and Physics/Astronomy.
Springer Requirement: already-published content, so 2017 or 2018.
Original offer: Mix and match of 2018 collections to spend $300,000.  
3 collections cost $300,000 each * Biomedical/Life  Sciences – 675 titles ($444/title) * Computer Science – 1106 titles ($271/title) * Medicine – 840 titles ($357/title)
5 collections cost $200,000 each * Chem/Materials Science – 337 titles ($593/title) * Earth/Environmental Science – 453 titles ($441/title) * Engineering – 1,112 titles ($180/title) * Math/Stats – 571 titles ($350/title) * Physics/Astron – 445 titles ($449/title)
12 collections cost $100,000 each * Behavioral Science & Psychology titles ($377/title) * Business & Management ($215/title) * Economics & Finance – 505 ($198/title) * Education ($190/title) * Energy – 155 ($645/title)

16. Update on T&F Title selections
First received stats to guide EBS title selection in late July 2018
Completed first round of title selections mid-August
Message from T&F to customers of errors on COUNTER reports late-August
Received second set of stats from T&F late September
Throughout the process, ESG has identified inconsistencies in provided usage stats
ESG recommendation – continue with title selections with second round of reports, acknowledging entire pilot has been rocky and reports seem better than the first round
T&F year 1 7,824 unique titles used 27,961 times from July 2017-May 2018 by 39 institutions (with dramatic interruptions in title consistency across Alliance members and MARC records issues) $10.73/use; $38.34/title Multiplier: 4X (all) Commitment Amount: $300,000
T&F Year 1 – updated stats (October 2018) 14,538 unique titles used 42,980 times from July 2017-June 2018 $6.98/use; $20.64/title
8,688 titles with 28,898 uses tagged as Orbis Owned titles – ESG recommends using for selection purposes

17. Questions? Discussion…
April 2017 SCT-Reps Survey priorities (27 repsondents):
High Value
Unlimited Simultaneous Users 78%
Minimum or No DRM 61%
Broad Subject Coverage % Front-list titles (3 years or newer) % Integration with Gobi % Title Stability as well as Cost & Predictability 82% Ease of Records Management 21% Quality records for discovery 78%
User Driven Acquisition rated high by 21 of 28; moderate by 6.
Patron Driven Acquisition rated low or no value by 18 of 28 respondents; moderate by 9.
Survey responses date 4/17/17-4/27/17
Comments on p 8/13 useful
Unlimited Simultaneous Users (78% high value); then Minimum/No DRM (61% high value)
User-driven acquisition rated high value by 21 of 28; moderate by 6
Patron-driven acquisition rated low or no value by 18; moderate by 9
Broad Subject Coverage rated high value by 19 of 28 respondents; moderate value by 8
Front-list titles (3 years or newer) rated high by 18 of 28; moderate by 10
Backfile titles rated low value by 14 of 28; moderate value by 11
Integration with Gobi (to minimize duplication) rated high value by 13 of 28; moderate by 10
Title Stability as well as Cost & Predictability - high value by 23; moderate value by 5 Ease of Records Management - high value by 21; moderate value by 6 (1 no response)
Questions? Discussion…