1. North American Storage Trust Discussion Group June 25, 2007 OCLC Blue Suite 2:00-3:00 pm Agenda  Welcome, Introductions  Update from RLG Programs (Malpas)  Update on service infrastructure and pilot implementation (Carney)  Questions / Open discussion

2. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust: Update and Next Steps Constance Malpas Program Officer RLG Programs ALA Annual Meeting ‘07 Washington, DC 25 June 2007

3. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 3 North American Storage Trust A collaborative approach to print preservation that leverages  Existing institutional infrastructure  55+ offsite storage repositories in North America  Prevailing (tacit) retention commitments  Weeding offsite collections is cost-prohibitive  Longstanding resource-sharing agreements  Robust network of inter-lending partnerships  Networked information environment  Long-term investments in cooperative cataloging = data that can be mined for new purposes to reduce redundancy, build system-wide capacity and create new economies of scale

4. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 4 Storage Registry Storage Facilities Holdings data Participating Library Participating Library Participating Libraries Storage Facilities Withdrawals Nonparticipating Libraries Nonparticipating Libraries Nonparticipating Libraries Direct to patron Withdrawals Collection analysis reports Transfers Commitments and Policies Global Directory ILL Priority loans Borrowing System Moving collection management to the network level creates new efficiencies and increases system-wide capacity

5. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 5 Who is currently involved? Long-term discussants: Vanderbilt University Ohio State University Library of Congress University of California Harvard Depository Center for Research Libraries WRLC ReCAP “ASERL Nine” Duke University University of South Carolina Tulane University University of Virginia University of Alabama Vanderbilt University University of Georgia Virginia Tech University of North Carolina Who’s interested? Most research institutions we’ve spoken with, within and beyond North America

6. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 6 North American Storage Trust – Timeline 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 D. Kelsey (U Minn.) off-site library storage collections will "never be weeded“ (ARL/OCLC Forum on Future Library Architecture) OCLC / Vanderbilt “last copies” study OCLC ASERL 9 Storage title overlap study ACRL fACRL forum 2008 OCLC / RLG OCLC survey ASERL “virtual shared storage” (Willis, Gherman) community consultation; OCLC team- building C&RL “last copies”last copies ASERL study: avg. storage need ≥ 300K vols by 2005 ARL Spec Kit Off-site ARL Spec Kit Remote Shelv. CLIR Report Print Repos. CLIR Report 5 Colleges 49+ ARL facilities 55+ ARL facilities CRL DPA pilot

7. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 7 Since January  Situating NAST within RLG Programs work agenda  Consultation with 30+ Program Partners in North America, the UK and Australia  Review of existing policy frameworks  Coordination with OCLC Business Development & New Initiatives  Bill Carney leading product development process  Last copies analysis  White paper on cooperative and networked library storage

8. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 8 I. RLG Programs Shared Print Collections Optimizing collection management for the networked environment N. Am. Storage Trust Networked coll’n mgt Deep resource sharing Data-mining for business intelligence 10 FTE based in Mountain View, CA; 150 premier research institutions

9. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 9 II. Networked Print Management Models  Physical consolidation  regional & national stores  ReCAP, PASCAL, UC, CASS, CARM  Virtual consolidation  distributed print repositories  CRL initiative, Orbis Cascade, CIRLA  North American Storage Trust  Prospective rationalization  collaborative acquisitions  last and single-copy initiatives  Past work by CLIR, CRL, ARL  starting point for NAST efforts Greatest near-term growth opportunity ASERL CDL CIC Columbia University Duke University Frick Art Reference Five Colleges, MA Harvard University University of Alberta University of California University of Edinburgh University of Glasgow University of Melbourne University of Minnesota University of Sydney University of Washington Yale University Imperial College London Leeds University MoMA NYPL Ohio State University Princeton University Swarthmore SUNY Libraries

10. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 10 III. Policy Frameworks for Shared Print  Networked Trust collections: a “club good”  maximize institutional interests in contributing to and supporting Trust network by increasing individual dependence on collective assets  University of California regional library storage facilities  Persistence policy (’06): if depositing library is unwilling or unable to maintain persistence guarantee (prohibition on permanent withdrawal), RLF is empowered to return the item to depositor and replace it with duplicate material from another campus Persistence policy  Penalty for non-participation = increased opportunity costs  Institutional autonomy is retained  Balance institutional interests, collective benefit  5 Colleges Affiliate Program: access, but no storage  Johns Hopkins University enforces “zero growth” policy

11. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 11 III. Policy Frameworks – add’l models  CRL Distributed Print Archive program  Model agreement addresses long-term retention, storage conditions, access privileges  Modified for use by Orbis Cascade  Last/single copy policies  Workflows for identifying and assessing last-copy status  UC, 5 Colleges OH, Tri-Universities Group, CARLI, etc.  Managing diminishing reserves

12. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 12 IV. Library Off-site Storage: State of Play  Authoritative synthesis of existing knowledge about transfer and management of library print collections in off-site storage facilities  Concise, substantive report intended for audience of library administrators  Actionable intelligence, expert guidance  Lizanne Payne, Washington Research Library Consortium  Anticipated completion: early autumn

13. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 13 V. System-wide Holdings: Characteristics  ASERL study (Burger, Gherman, Wilson - ACRL ‘05)  Little redundancy in existing storage collections  Results consistent with subsequent analyses of aggregate holdings (TRLN, CIC, Google 5, ARL/OCLC Global Resources report)  Vanderbilt study (Connaway,O’Neill, Prabha - C&RL ‘06)  23K (of 1.5M) titles held by Vanderbilt alone  Cataloging issues; last manifestations; last expressions  Current analysis (O’Neill, Lavoie, Malpas)  Est. 40% of monographic holdings in WorldCat are held by just one member of the OCLC cooperative  Identifying “truly unique” content – a priority in collaborative print management  Anticipate completion by end of summer 2007, paper to follow

14. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 14 Assessing system-wide distribution – the big picture >900 M volumes held in US academic libraries - how many are in off-site storage facilities? - how many unique holdings, last copies?

15. RLG Programs North American Storage Trust Update ALA Annual Meeting, 25 June 2007 15 District of Columbia +10M volumes in ac. libraries +1M in WRLC storage California + 82M volumes in ac. libraries + 10M volumes in UC RLF storage (est) 10 – 12% of total academic holdings represented in storage collections – is this enough? Need better tools to assess system-wide distribution of preservation holdings -- Title and copy-specific condition data -- Facility characteristics -- Institutional policies