1. Cooperative E-Resource Licensing in Florida Bringing together institutions of higher education CDRS Conference Florida State University, Tallahassee March 26, 2009

2. Higher education in Florida State University System (SUS)  11 institutions with a total FTE of 187,771, ranging in size from FTE of 629 (NCF) to FTE of 34,792 (UF)  Supported by the Florida Center for Library Automation (FCLA) Florida College System (FCS)  28 community college and colleges (81 campuses) with an approximate FTE of 300,000, ranging in size from FTE of 722 (Florida Keys CC) to FTE 49,607 (Miami Dade College)  Supported by the College Center for Library Automation (CCLA) Independent Colleges and University of Florida (ICUF)  28 institutions with a total FTE of 113,454, ranging in size from FTE of 112 (Beacon College) to 18,457 (Nova Southeastern)  No central organization supporting the libraries

3. Licensing Activities CCLA and FCLA  Have staff positions dedicated to licensing activities  Receive funding from the State Government for e- resources  Act as agents on behalf of SUS and FCS libraries for independently funded resources. This (with a few exceptions) is a relatively new activity for FCLA when position of E-Resources Licensing Specialist was established to handle SUS Library funded e-journal packages  Benefit from State Library funded e-resources from OCLC and Gale through the Florida Electronic Library

4. Licensing Activities, cont’d ICUF  Director of Stetson Library coordinates annual database renewal and acquisitions process between vendors and ICUF institutions  Licensing done by individual participating libraries  No central funding source, but Stetson acts as single fiscal agent  Success of program is dependent upon the good will and efforts of a single individual

5. Challenges of Expanding Cooperative Licensing Ventures Resolve and simplify legal & contractual issues Reconcile varying vendor pricing models Determine funding methodology and identify fiscal agent Develop multi-system collection development process Manage and coordinate communication across three disparate systems

6. Legal & Contractual Issues Do you need a separate legal entity? How complicated is it to create contracts that cross SUS, FCS, and ICUF institutions? Is it possible to set up multi-year contracts so that others might join mid-term? What risk might be imposed on the contracting body – especially when participating libraries might be outside the “system”?

7. Legal & Contractual Issues: Answers Do you need a separate legal entity?  Simple answer – no How complicated is it to create contracts that cross SUS, FCS, and ICUF institutions?  Not necessarily that complicated  Language in a piggyback contract which references original contract  Letter by participating library authorizing the contracting body to sign on that library’s behalf  Signed addendum by each participating library  Business terms centrally negotiated with individual contracts signed by each participating library

8. Legal & Contractual Issues: Answers Is it possible to set up multi-year contracts so that others might join mid-term?

9. Legal & Contractual Issues: Answers What risk might be imposed on the contracting body – particularly for multi-year contracts?  Limitation of liability clause  Early Termination Due to Insufficient Budgetary Allotment clause

10. Pricing Models For single institutional subscriptions  FTE based pricing – on FTE only, FTE range (e.g. 1-5000, 5000 – 10,000)  Flat annual fee  Pricing based upon number of simultaneous users.  Pricing by institution type (associate’s, bachelor's, etc.)  Pricing based upon number of degrees granted in a particular area. Used primarily for highly specialized databases  Often, some combination of the above is used. For consortia, all of the above might apply, plus  Incremental discounts for increased level of participation – “Buyer’s Club” model  Minimum spend required for participation  Multi year agreements

11. Pricing Models: Solutions Develop general guidelines for cost-sharing between institutions of varying sizes Establish guidelines for percentage discounts based upon participation levels Work creatively to develop new models for pricing Pricing models are ultimately dependent upon negotiations with vendors

12. Funding & Fiscal Agency Issues Working with centralized funding is the easiest -- but there is no legal entity established to serve all constituents Institution serving as fiscal agent on behalf of others undertakes a substantial risk Not all institutions are funded equally. How do you keep things equitable for smaller institutions?

13. Funding & Fiscal Agency: Solutions FCLA establish Auxiliary to position itself to handle more complicated fiscal relationships Develop a proposal for the State Legislature to fund core e-resource collection for higher education institutions, with mechanisms for participation by all built into model Explore use of a subscription agent to facilitate cooperative purchases

14. Collection Development Current mechanisms for determining databases to purchase  CCLA Conducts online survey to collect interest level of products Advisory Board process  FCLA Collaboration with SUL Collection Planning Committee/Electronic Resources Subcommittee Annual review process

15. Collection Development ICUF  Fiscal Agent polls membership to assess interest in products  Vendors are invited to make proposal and establish database trial  Vendors present proposal at annual May meeting  Member libraries have a 4-6 week period to make decisions for fall cycle

16. Collection Development Issues Identifying content that is relevant to the majority Decision making process is time-consuming and lengthy, with extensive back and forth with both libraries and vendors Some online resources – such as e-journal packages – require gathering of very detailed title level information from each participating institution Savings on existing subscriptions may be achieved if new libraries are brought in – challenging in tough economic times

17. Collection Development: Solutions Form a small steering committee of FCLA and CCLA Licensing Staff, and ICUF representative to:  align and coordinate collection development efforts where appropriate  Set-up joint FCLA, CCLA and ICUF meetings with vendors  attend key annual meetings where collections are the focus ICUF Annual Vendor Meeting in May CCLA Advisory Board or Executive Committee meetings SUL CPC/ERS Joint Fall Meeting Create a wiki (or other online forum) for discussion among concerned entities

18. Collection Development: Solutions Develop a mechanism for collecting information on existing e-resources and unmet curricular needs Hold centralized trials Establish rating criteria to facilitate the decision making process for adding new e-resources Consider going to multi-year agreements for existing subscribed content at lower price caps where other savings mechanisms are unlikely to be successful

19. Management Issues E-resources require support beyond initial licensing and subscription, such as troubleshooting access problems, managing link resolvers and A-Z lists, usage statistics, etc. Current levels of staffing are insufficient to support expanded cooperative licensing efforts across the state. Communication at multi-campus, multi-library institutions can be a challenge at the institutional level, let alone at the state level Coordinating task and time lines with distant and diverse institutions with their own schedules, responsibilities, subscription terms and fiscal years (ICUF) can be difficult

20. Management: Solutions Additional staff would need to be put into place, particularly where efforts are on a volunteer basis Responsibilities for all libraries and librarians should be clearly defined Deadlines would need to be established and strictly maintained A centralized tracking system for contracts and payments would need to be implemented

21. In Conclusion… Despite the issues, cooperation is doable Current economic climate provides opportunities Next steps  Report out to various constituencies  Establish Steering Committee  Develop a plan of action  Establish online communication tool (e.g. WIKI)  Begin gathering data about the SUS, FCS, and ICUF

22. Contact Information Melvin Davis Digital Resources Consultant College Center for Library Automation mdavis@cclaflorida.org Claire T. Dygert E-Resources Licensing Specialist Florida Center for Library Automation cdygert@ufl.edu Betty D. Johnson Library Director and Professor duPont-Ball Library Stetson University bjohnson@stetson.edu