CORAL: Implementing an open source ERM


Published on

Presenter: Andrea Imre, Southern Illinois University Carbondale
This session will focus on the benefits and challenges of implementing
CORAL (Centralized Online Resource Acquisitions and Licensing), an open
source ERM developed at the University of Notre Dame. CORAL offers
libraries the option to reorganize their electronic resource management
workflow and to collect information about their electronic resources into one
central place without having to commit funding for a new library software
from the ever shrinking library budget. CORAL currently includes four
modules: licensing, resources, organization, and usage statistics. In addition
to the challenges that are faced in any ERM implementation such as data
collection, data preparation, staff buy in, etc., this session will address issues
specific to using an open source software in an academic library.

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Voyager since 2003SFX since 2006CARLI RFP for ERM 2008-2009
  • ERL & acquisition staff member entered most data initially
  • 127
  • 83 licenses added so far
  • 127 resources (some packages among these)
  • CORAL: Implementing an open source ERM

    1. 1. NASIG 2012Andrea Imre, Southern Illinois University Carbondale
    2. 2.  Developed at the University of Notre Dame’s Hesburgh Libraries 1st module released in the Summer of 2010 4 modules:  Resources  Licensing  Organizations  Usage Reports More info with technical documentation, download instructions, forum, listserv info at
    3. 3. Budget: Materials budget: $5.6 million (FY11) Electronic resource expenditure: $4 million (FY11)Staff with responsibilities for e-resources: Electronic Resources Librarian (ERL) 3 Collection Development Librarians 1 Acquisition staff 1 Accounting staff
    4. 4. Commercial products:  Voyager  SFX (linkresolver, A-Z journal list, MARCit, UStats)  EBSCONET  Libguides (databases A-Z and subject guides)Other Tools: Excel files E-mail Personal folders on computers Networked shared folders File cabinets
    5. 5.  Checking status of new orders (licensing, ordering, payment, access) Eliminating potential gaps in workflow Centralized database for vendor info Centralized database for licenses Web interface Easy tool to use
    6. 6.  Limited resources dedicated for ERM implementation  Cost of a commercial ERM  Staff Modular infrastructure allows phased-in implementation Web interface Workflow management
    7. 7.  Installed all modules: October 2011 Licensing module  Scanned in all paper licenses  Uploaded all digital licenses Resources module  Resource records for existing licenses  New orders entered by collection development librarians after demo in March  Records as renewals come up Organizations module  Added related organization info for existing licenses and resources
    8. 8.  No annual fees/or subscription fees Easy installation Meets my library’s needs Centralized storage for e-resources contact information Organized license information Workflow management Simple interface
    9. 9.  It’s not a replacement of existing tools Staff buy-in Limited staff / time dedicated for implementation Manual data entry Duplicate data entry No customer service Rely on library systems staff and on listserv feedback for technical problems
    10. 10.  Establish workflow routines for renewals Share licensing data with staff/patrons via SFX Continue populating licensing, resources, and organizations modules
    11. 11. Andrea ImreSouthern Illinois University CarbondaleMorris