1. MALLCO Group Collection Analysis Paul D. Callister, JD, MSLIS, Library Director & Associate Professor of Law

2. Potential Studies Relative & Collective Strengths –Percentage of Resources Accessible through ILL –Subject (Per LC Classification Scheme by Call Nos.) Comparative Law Areas of Emphasis Interdisciplinary –Mapping –Historical –Formats (Microfilm, Electronic, Print, etc.) –Language (e.g., Foreign Law materials in English) –Uniqueness & “Held by” –Benchmarks (Core, Subject Areas, Collection Mixes, etc.) Potential ILL Networks (I-40, I-70, I-80, I29-71-540) Collaborative Collection Development/Weeding) Comparisons to “Top 10 Law Schools”

3. Relative & Collective Strengths “Mr. Baguio” by Gomi, at http://www.flickr.com/photos/gmax/52921838/http://www.flickr.com/photos/gmax/52921838/

4. I-40 Schools (Law Classes, Print & Serial Formats)

6. I-70 Schools (Law Classes, Print & Serial Formats)

7. MALLCO (Law Classes, Print & Serial Formats)

8. I-40 Schools (Asian & Eurasian Law Classes, Print & Serial Formats)

9. Holdings as Percentage of Total Titles

10. Percentage Accessible

11. Unique Holdings as Percentage Held by One Institution

12. Benchmarks for Areas of Emphasis

13. This slide is based upon categories that correlate to the law school’s areas of emphasis, Tax LL.M program and Foreign and International Law. The data was gleaned from 459 LOC Classes (based on call nos.). Various LOC Classes were assigned to the different categories. The thinking was that UMKC should at least carry its weight (20%) with respect to its areas of emphasis and its Tax LL.M program. Furthermore it needed to catch up in Foreign, Comparative and International Law. Gov. docs are again excluded.

14. Using the data about percentage deficiencies, it is possible to determine the number of titles UMKC’s Law library would need to “carry its weight,” with respect to the school’s areas of emphasis and the Tax, LL.M. program, among the four Missouri law schools in the MOBIUS consortium. Collection planning, with estimates for growth, can be based upon these numbers.

15. Holdings over Time

16. MALLCO Aggregate Holdings over Time (Books & Serials –Subject Class Specific)

17. Mapping Consortium Strengths

20. Uniqueness and “Held by”

22. Uniqueness-All MALLCO Titles (Books & Serials, All Subjects)

23. Uniqueness-All MALLCO Titles (Books & Serials, Law of Asia & Eurasia)

24. I 70 I 80 I 40 I 29 Potential ILL Networks

25. Comparison to Top 10

26. This slide compares UMKC to holdings of eight of the Top Ten Law Schools (based on U.S. News & World Report). It is helpful in understanding whether we provide a “core” collection.

27. To improve our “core” collection, I downloaded all 3742 titles held by eight of the top law schools that we don’t hold. We discovered that there were some significant omissions in our cataloging items (as reported by WorldCat). They provided a free audit to help us upload the missing titles. We also had a great list of titles to consider for our “core.”

28. The End