1. COUNTER Code of Practice: An update ICOLC Spring Meeting April 2007 Montreal, Canada Presented by Oliver Pesch opesch@ebsco.com EBSCO Information Services

2. Overview Background Quick review of COUNTER Audit SUSHI Consortia Reports Future Challenges

3. Background Usage seen as one measurement of value Cost per use for collection management Search counts to measure value of databases Use counts to help measure “impact” of faculty research Usage statistics Should enlighten rather than obscure Should be practical Are only part of the story Should be used in context Should be reliable

4. Usage Statistics: The problems Inconsistencies in counting Terminology (what is a download) What and when to count Inconsistencies in format Each content provider has their own format Different labels, columns and rows Inconsistencies in delivery Email, versus phone request, versus FTP Online versus paper Amount of history offered Timeliness

5. COUNTER: Codes of Practice Definitions of terms used Specifications for Usage Reports What they should include What they should look like How and when they should be delivered Data processing guidelines Auditing Compliance

6. COUNTER: current Codes of Practice 1) Journals and databases Release 1 Code of Practice launched January 2003 Release 2 published April 2005 replacing Release 1 in January 2006 Now a widely adopted standard by publishers and librarians 9000+ journals now covered Librarians use it in collection development decisions Publishers use it in marketing to prove ‘value’ 2) Books and reference works Release 1 Code of Practice launched March 2006 4 vendors now compliant Relevant usage metrics less clear than for journals Different issues than for journals Direct comparisons between books less relevant Understanding how different categories of book are used is more relevant

7. Journal and Database Code of Practice Usage Reports Journal Report 1 Full text article requests by month and journal Journal Report 2 Turnaways by month and journal Database Report 1 Total searches and sessions by month and database Database Report 2 Turnaways by month and database Database Report 3 Searches and sessions by month and service

8. Journal and Database Code of Practice Usage Reports Journal Report 1 Full text article requests by month and journal Journal Report 2 Turnaways by month and journal Database Report 1 Total searches and sessions by month and database Database Report 2 Turnaways by month and database Database Report 3 Searches and sessions by month and service

9. Code of Practice for books Book Report 1 Number of successful requests by month and title Book Report 2 Number of successful section requests by month and title Book Report 3 Turnaways by month and title Book Report 4 Turnaways by month and service Book Report 5 Total searches and sessions by month and title Book Report 6 Total searches and sessions by month and service

10. Journal Report 1 Full text article requests by journal Html and PDF totals reported separately

11. COUNTER: Audit Independent audit required within 18 months of compliance, and annually thereafter Audit is online, using scripts provided in the Code of Practice Auditor can be: Any Chartered Accountant Another COUNTER-approved auditor ABCE is the first COUNTER-approved auditor Industry-owned Not-for-profit Independent and impartial Part of ABC (Audit Bureau of Circulations) Providing website traffic audits for over 150 companies and certifying over 1400 domains Test audits on COUNTER usage reports successful

12. SUSHI Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative (SUSHI) Was no mechanism yet for automatically retrieving, combining, and storing COUNTER usage data from different sources Using COUNTER reports labour intensive for librarians NISO-sponsored XML-based SUSHI provide a means to do just this, via a standard model for machine to machine automation of statistics harvesting. In 2005 COUNTER and NISO signed an agreement to work together on the development of SUSHI. Draft SUSHI protocol was published in May 2006. Final protocol, which will be a NISO standard, will be published in 2007. More details of SUSHI can be found at:- http://www.niso.org/committees/SUSHI/SUSHI_comm.html

13. Consortium Reports Current reports are inadequate Committee formed to seek input and propose alternatives Peter Shepherd, Project COUNTER Kathy Perry, VIVA Oliver Pesch, EBSCO Information Services New COUNTER Consortial Reports Full text download requests Database searches

14. Consortium Reports Key points addressed Usage data broken out by consortium member Results presented in a single “report” Simplify access (via SUSHI or single password for consortium staff to access for all members) Provide framework for reporting on mixed genre collections (e.g. books and journals)

15. Consortium Reports Only available in XML Too complex for spreadsheets Too large for spreadsheets Requires “processing” by consortium XML is most versatile option Proposed COUNTER schema update will be support Consortium Reports as well as all other reports

16. Consortium Reports: Proposed structure Report Customer Report Items Report Item Report Item Metric Report Item Report Item Metric Customer Report Items

17. Consortium Reports: Proposed structure Report: Consortium Report 1 Customer Report Items Report Item Report Item Metric Report Item Report Item Metric Customer Report Items …

18. Consortium Reports: Proposed structure Report: Consortium Report 1 Customer: Institution A Report Items Report Item Report Item Metric Report Item Report Item Metric Customer: Institution B Report Items …

19. Consortium Reports: Proposed structure Report: Consortium Report 1 Customer: Institution A Report Items Report Item: Journal A Report Item Metric Report Item: Journal B Report Item Metric Customer: Institution B Report Items …

20. Consortium Reports: Proposed structure Report: Consortium Report 1 Customer: Institution A Report Items Report Item: Journal A Report Item Metric: PDF requests = 200 Report Item Metric: HTML request = 300 Report Item: Journal B Report Item Metric: PDF requests = 100 Report Item Metric: HTML requests = 140 Customer: Institution B Report Items …

21. Consortium Reports: Proposed structure Report: Consortium Report 1 Customer: Institution A Report Items Report Item: Journal A Report Item Metric: PDF requests = 200 Report Item Metric: HTML request = 300 Report Item: Journal B Report Item Metric: PDF requests = 100 Report Item Metric: HTML requests = 140 Customer: Institution B Report Items … Tansy Matthews of VIVA is conducting a breakout session on working with XML later this conference.

22. Consortium Reports: Outstanding Questions Account Structures at Vendor Sites Does the vendor’s host track relationship between consortium’s account and member accounts? Can vendor’s host report usage of content acquired by the consortium without reporting on other materials acquired by institution? Data Filtering and Privacy Who limits the report to just material provided by the consortium? If vendor over-reports, is there a privacy concern related to the vendor providing additional usage to the consortium

23. Future challenges Improving/extending the Codes of Practice Reliability ( audit, federated searches, interface effect) Usability (number of compliant vendors, XML format, additional usage reports) Additional data (archives, year of publication, article level reports) Categories of content (Institutional Repository content) Deriving metrics from the Codes of Practice Journals (cost per use, Usage Factor) Databases? Books?

24. Next steps….. Release 3 of Code of Practice for Journals/Databases Features: prioritisation on basis of demand and practicality Process: consultation via focus groups,etc; publication of draft CoP Release 2 of Code of Practice for Books Review R1 in practice Other categories of content ( eg Institutional Repositories) Metrics derived from the COUNTER usage statistics Cost per use Usage Factor

25. What can you do to support COUNTER? Require online journal, database and book vendors to provide COUNTER compliant usage statistics Clause for licence agreements is provided in the COUNTER Code of Practice (Section 7.2) Monitor the relevant listservs on usage statistics issues lib-stats@newcastle.ac.uk Use the COUNTER usage reports Demonstrate the value of the COUNTER usage reports to your management/administration Alert COUNTER to problems with vendor reports Become a member of COUNTER Membership fees are our major source of income………..

26. COUNTER Membership Member Categories and Annual Fees (2007) Publishers/intermediaries: £530 (US$800) Library Consortia: £355 (US$530) Libraries: £265 (US$400) Industry organization: £265 (US$400) Benefits of full membership Owner of COUNTER with voting rights at annual general meeting, etc. Discount on audit fee for publishers/intermediaries Regular bulletins on progress Opportunity to receive advice on implementation

27. http://www.projectcounter.org Apply for COUNTER membership

28. For more information………. http://www.projectcounter.org Thank you! Peter Shepherd, COUNTER pshepherd@projectcounter.org