1. ILS Selection Partner Meeting July 22, 2008

2. Meeting Agenda  Opening & Introductions (10 minutes)  Project Scope (15 minutes)  Project Timeline (15 minutes)  Communication & Project Resource Overview (10 minutes)  Current Vendor List (20 minutes)  QA (15 minutes)  Wrap-up (5 minutes)

3. Meeting Purpose  High Plains Library District is currently on a system no longer in active development.  Determine if other libraries are interested in joining efforts with HPLD in an ILS selection process.

4. At the end of this meeting you will...  Understand the HPLD project process  What benefits may be gained by partnering with HPLD  How to participate in this project

5. Related state ILS projects  State Open Source ILS Committee  May CPLD Meeting (Jamie LaRue)  ILS Summit (CLiC)

6. Why this project?  HPLD needs to have made a change by 2010  This project is NOT a single, statewide ILS running on a centralized set of hardware (or the like)  This project OFFERS an alignment of libraries through the selection of the same vendor Cost savings Eliminate duplication of efforts where possible Perhaps a first step toward enabling a statewide system

7. Why this may be of interest to you?  You’ll have access to all planning documents that HPLD develops during it’s ILS feasibility process Let someone else do the planning and organizing!  All participating libraries meet at “convergence” points to discuss the process Clear points of alignment Not group meetings throughout (to keep the project moving forward)  You will be provided a free web space for your organization to use for the project  If multiple libraries choose the same vendor, explore possible group buying options Save money Save time through shared implementation efforts  Example: one library creates training videos on X and shares them with all partners

8. Project Scope  Project Product  Project Justification  Measures of Success Assumptions/Limitations  Decision Criteria

9. Project Product  An agreed upon decision regarding go/no go for an ILS change  Implementation of agreed upon actions which may be the selection and implementation of a new ILS or the decision to hold and reassess at a later time and replace hardware in the interim.

10. Project Justification  SirsiDynix has ended development of the Horizon product which will eventually require us to migrate to a different system. It is a given that HPLP will have to migrate. Initial server cost was roughly $50k. Overall IL S cost as an upgrade was approx $250k (upgrade/migration planning only). The cost of a new/different cost is estimated to range from $250k-$1M.  The HPLD Horizon server will no longer be supported after approximately June 2010.  There currently is no formal end of life for Horizon. However, SirsiDynix states that once it is decided to no longer support this platform there will be two years until support is suspended.  Every 3-4 years as part of due diligence HPLD will evaluate alternate ILS opportunities.

11. Decision Structure  Project Sponsor (project sponsor is responsible for obtaining Board and Director direction/support)  Project Team  Individual Resource Experts

12. Measures of Success

13. Decision Criteria  Cost  Features  Vendor Reputation  Vendor Support  Compatibility with other systems  Vendor Stability  Number of Comparable libraries using this solution  Organizational fit with HPLD  Pain to change  Product Design

14. Project RisksProject Risks Project Objective: Very Low/.05Low/.10Moderate/,20High/.40Very High/.80 Cost exceeds by <5%exceeds by 5-10%exceeds by 10-25%exceeds by 25-30%exceeds by > 30% Time fully operational by Jan 1 2010 fully operational by Feb 1 2010 fully operational by March 1 2010 fully operational by APril 1 2010 fully operational by May 1 2010 Scope Scope change barley noticeable Minor areas of scope affected Major areas of scope affected Scope reduction unaccepta ble to sponsor Final solution is effectively useless Quality Quality degradatio n barely noticeable Only small areas affected by quality issues Quality reduction requires sponsor acknowled gement and approval Quality reduction unaccepta ble to sponsor Final solution is effectively useless IMPACT Very Low/.05Low/.10Moderate/,20High/.40Very High/.80 Probability 0.9 0.0450.090.180.360.72 0.7 0.0350.070.140.280.56 0.5 0.0250.050.10.20.4 0.3 0.0150.030.060.120.24 0.1 0.0050.010.020.040.08

15. Risk Probabili tyImpact Overall Risk ScoreMitigation Steps 1 A new/better product or release will surface midway into the project 0.90.20.18 1) monthly formal reports on new emerging solutions 2) deadline for solutions that meet clear requirements (must be operational as an example) -- after deadline live with options…don't look back 3) communication that something better will come along. educate board on process 2 Overhead in coordinating multi organization effort may impair any participant 0.70.20.14 1) present project w/ clear expectations so partners know requirements 2) design with convergence and decision points which allow for flexibility from any organization 3 Equipment failure prior to the scheduled migration date 0.30.10.03 Equipment failure would be no different than when outside of the project - warranty to cover Project RisksProject Risks

16. Project Timeline (2008)  May/June, 2008 – Evaluate HPLD’s requirements (done)  July, 2008 – Confirm interested libraries partners TODAY: Partner Convergence Point: July 22, 2008  Initial Partner Interest Meeting  August/September, 2008 – Compile Vendor Information Partner Convergence Point: September 24, 2008  Determine if similar top 3-5 vendors  October/November, 2008 – Create RFP and prepare for Bidder’s Conference Partner Convergence Point: December 11, 2008  Conduct Bidder’s Conference (all day)

17. Project Timeline (2009)  December, 2008 /January, 2009 – Receive and review vendor responses Partner Convergence Point: January 30, 2009  Narrow down to top 2 vendors  February-June, 2009 - Top Vendor Review Process Partner Convergence Point: July 13, 2009  Conduct final vendor selection  July/August, 2009 – Complete Vendor Contracting Partner Convergence Point: September 9, 2009  Final vendor selection  October, 2009 – Start ILS Changes/Implementation Partner Convergence Point: October 9, 2009  Discuss what implementation components can be shared

18. Tentative HPLD Timeline Beyond 2009  October/November, 2009 – Procure hardware, install ILS  December, 2009 – Test/Fine-tune installation  January/February, 2010 – Train staff  March, 2010 – Prep for final migration  April, 2010 – Migrate to new ILS  June, 2010 – Close project

19. Partner Communication/Project Resources  HPLD site will contain all project documents  All meetings will be recorded  Access & Use of personal project workspace (contact Susan Staples for more info)  Weekly notes and formal monthly project updates posted on web and email notices sent to participants

20. HPLD Initial Vendor Exploration  List of ILS from the “Helping you Buy” Computer in Libraries series  Limited to libraries that have a strong public library presence

21. HPLD Original Vendor List  Agent VERSO / Auto-Graphics, Inc  Apollo / Biblionix  Atriuum / Book Systems, Inc.  Spydus / Civica Pty., Ltd.  Evergreen / Equinox Software  Vubis Smart / Info Library and Information Solutions  Amlib Library Management System / Infovision Software Inc.  Millennium / Innovative Interfaces, Inc.  Library 4 Universal (L4U) / Kelowna Software, Ltd.  Koha ZOOM / Liblime  PC Card Catalog / Library Concepts  Mandarin Oasis / Mandarin Library Automation  LiBRARYSOFT / New Generation Technologies, Inc.  SISI-SunRise / OCLC PICA  Polaris Integrated Library System / Polaris Library Systems  Symphony / SirsiDynix  Liberty / Softlink  Surpass Centriva / Surpass Software  Talis  CARL.X / The Library Corp. TLC  Library-Solution / The Library Corp. - TLC  Virtua / VTLS, Inc.

22. Excluded because too small  Agent VERSO / Auto- Graphics, Inc  Apollo / Biblionix  Atriuum / Book Systems, Inc.  Spydus / Civica Pty., Ltd.  Vubis Smart / Info Library and Information Solutions  Amlib Library Management System / Infovision Software Inc.  Library 4 Universal (L4U) / Kelowna Software, Ltd.  Koha ZOOM / Liblime  PC Card Catalog / Library Concepts  Mandarin Oasis / Mandarin Library Automation  LiBRARYSOFT / New Generation Technologies, Inc.  SISI-SunRise / OCLC PICA  Liberty / Softlink  Surpass Centriva / Surpass Software  Library-Solution / The Library Corp. - TLC  Virtua / VTLS, Inc.

23. Watch List (because of feature set)  Evergreen / Equinox Software (may reevaluate if development is fast enough) Currently to Acquisitions module or z39.50 server (which is required for SWIFT)

24. HPLD Current Vendor List  Millennium / Innovative Interfaces, Inc.  Polaris Integrated Library System / Polaris Library Systems  Symphony / SirsiDynix  Talis (kept as a wildcard)  Library-Solution / The Library Corp. - TLC

25. Questions?

26. Next Steps  Decide if your library would like to be involved in the HPLD ILS Project  Email or call Gem Stone-Logan by August 1, 2008 if interested  gstone-logan@weld.lib.co.us