No Crystal Ball (Paoshan Yue and Gail Stanton)
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•311 views
2014 Charleston Conference Friday, Nov 7, 2:15 PM
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to No Crystal Ball (Paoshan Yue and Gail Stanton)
Similar to No Crystal Ball (Paoshan Yue and Gail Stanton) (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
No Crystal Ball (Paoshan Yue and Gail Stanton)
- 1. Planningfor CertainFuture Cuts When theFuture isUncertain PaoshanYue&GailStanton UniversityofNevada,Reno 2014CharlestonConference November7,2014 http://activerain.trulia.com/image_store/uploads/agents/mdefede/files/crystalball.jpg
- 2. State-funded public (land grant) university Fall 2014 enrollment of 21,206 (Headcount) 17,947 undergraduate students 3,259 graduate students 145+ degree programs offered
- 3. Mathewson-IGT Knowledge Center Opened doors August 11, 2008 Library material budget: ~$4 million Provided (almost) equally by state fund and student tuition fees 90% is spent on electronic resources 15 Subject Liaisons
- 4. Annual Collections expenditures have declined overall by $350,000.
- 5. Upcoming Budget from Univ. JunAprMarFebJan DecOctSepAugJuly Nov May Student Enrollment Numbers Year-end One-time Money Standing Orders Inflation Rate Demand Driven Acquisitions & Copyright Clearning Center Fees
- 6. Appropriation: $4,128,077.00 Expected Costs: $4,540,623.00 Deficit: $412,546.00 June 2014 Projection: Flat Collections Budget
- 7. Upcoming Budget from Univ. MayMarFebJanDecNovSepAugJulyJun Oct Apr Student Enrollment Numbers Year-end One-time Money Comprehensive Journal Review Journal Package Review Database Review
- 8. Scope: All active individual journal subscriptions Overlap with Other Sources Total Cost (Print) > $400 > $5/Use Mono Series Cancelled Total Cost (E) > $1,000 Used < 50/Year A title was flagged for liaison review if it met at least one of these criteria. Criteria set by Assistant Dean for Collections
- 9. ERAS Dept. • Compiled 2 master journal lists w/ all the required data • June 1 – July 7 2014 Liaisons • Reviewed their own subjects and marked their decisions for First Cut • July 8-21, 2014 AD + Liaisons • AD responded to liaison decisions • Internal cross- subject dispute phase • Finalized a list of “Journals to be cancelled” • July 22 – Aug 12, 2014 STEP 1 (~5wks) STEP 2 (~2wks) STEP 3 (~3wks)
- 10. ERAS Dept. • Prepared the list of “journals to be cancelled” for the next “Campus Dispute” phase • Aug 6-12, 2014 Faculty + Liaisons + AD • Faculty dispute any of the titles on the “to be cancelled” list. • Aug 13 – Sep 5, 2014 AD • Finalized the journal cancellation list • Sep 6 - 12, 2014 ERAS Dept. • Informed vendors & publishers • Sept 15 - , 2014 STEP 4 (~1wks) STEP 5 (~4wks) STEP 6 (~1wks) STEP 7
- 11. KEY! Make it easy for liaisons to review/decide DATA GROUPS REVIEW INDICATORS • Use < 50/Year • CPU > $5 • Overlap, etc. LIAISON DECISIONS • Decision options • Liaison comment BASIC DATA • Cost, Use, CPU • Subject • Title • Publisher TITLE RELATIONSHIP • Order # • Family Check • Family Sort TITLE LINKS • URL to look up in E-Journal Portal • URL to look up in catalog ADDITIONAL DATA • Bib # • ISSN • Vendor ADMIN DATA • ERAS use only
- 12. Data Source • ILS (III Sierra) • Vendor journal renewal lists • Usage Stats System Computing • Excel • Access • SharePoint Workflow Management • SharePoint LIST database w/ multi-views • Centralized data input by all Communi- cation • LibGuide • SharePoint • Meetings www.artistsvalley.com/images/icons/Database%20Application%20Icons/Datasource%20Fe ed/256x256/Datasource%20Feed.jpg http://incedogroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/20140421-Business-communication.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/P_computing.svg
- 14. “After the cancellations, what journals do I still have in my subject areas? ” - Liaisons A bigger context for liaisons: A complete list of all the full-text e-journals available to users, including back file and open access titles. A pivot table for all online journals by subject, allowing filtering journal titles across packages/platforms by subject http://www.ccra.com/checkin/oct11/pie-chartMoney2.jpg
- 15. Proposed cancellations by liaison & subject
- 16. 554 journal subscription cancellations 340 Print journals 214 Electronic journals Achieved approximately $200,000 in savings http://fox2now.com/2014/07/15/ui-could-request-4-percent-state-funding-increaese/
- 17. Project completed in 3.5 months Quick turnaround for data gathering and data presentation Centralized SharePoint list database for workflow management Good Communication & Cooperation from liaisons & faculty
- 18. Enrollment in Fall 2014: a 9.5 % increase! What does this mean to the collections budget? A one-time additional fund for library collections! A 2.5% overall increase in library’s budget! http://cdn.cutestpaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/l-A-kitty-surprise.jpg
- 19. Reduced pressure for journal package & database reviews Consider wish lists for high-demand materials Get users what we don’t have Get It Now ILL article borrowing requests
- 20. Communication with Liaisons & Faculty Data challenges Not sure if savings will cover shortage during the process
- 21. Incorporate collection review activities into regular workflows Collection analysis: Assess impact of cancelled journals on ILL article borrowing requests: Wish lists for smart purchases Start early if we need to do cancellation projects outside of regular workflows
- 22. Planning for certain future cuts? It is a moving target! Our approach? Establish a review system Remain flexible http://www.goodriskgovernancepays.com/Dollar%20and%20Dartboard.jpg
Editor's Notes
- Good afternoon! In this session, we will discuss how two academic libraries plan for future cuts when the future is uncertain.
- Talk about who we are and where we come from.
- More information…
- Due to a marked decline in monetary support from the State of Nevada, our budget allocation from the University has been reduced or remained flat for the past seven years, resulting in a $350,000.00 decline in our annual collections expenditures. In order to accommodate these shortages, we have implemented subscription cancellation projects and relied more heavily on our student tuition fees and donor gift funds to help offset our shrinking funds.
- Uncertain future: 1. Unpredictable budget In July, we typically receive information about the next fiscal year’s library materials budget allocation amount and begin allocating to specific fund accounts. Right after the fall semester begins, student enrollment numbers are gathered and posted, which may mean additional funding from student tuition fees. In April, we have sometimes seen end-of-year infusions of one-time year-end monies from unspent university funding sources. 2. Unpredictable expenses Inflation rate Standing orders DDA expenditures & ILL CCC (Copyright Clearance Center fees)-- Additionally, there are always some unexpected expenditures that crop up and need to be addressed. It is all a balancing act really. Some costs go down while other go up to offset the savings.
- According to our Assistant Dean for Collections’ calculations in June of this year, the 2014-15 budgetary appropriation projections and expenditures indicated a substantial library materials funding deficit of approximately $412,546.00, which required UNR libraries to make some major subscription cancellations in order to balance our budget for the coming fiscal year. So, we strategized about how to go about implementing subscription cancellations and decided upon a three-phase rollout process.
- Our three-phase strategy included 1) a comprehensive journal review, 2) a journal package review, and 3) a database review. During our comprehensive journal review, all of our active continuing subscriptions were reviewed and assessed to uncover the most likely journal cancellation candidates, including individual titles, mini-journal packages, memberships, and combination subscriptions, which were handled primarily through our two major subscription agents. In Phases 2 & 3, large journal packages and databases subscribed to directly through publishers are looked at on a month-by-month basis by our Assistant Dean (AD) for Collections as they come due.
- Our comprehensive journal review, Phase 1, included all active individual journal subscriptions. SCOPE: So - why look at all journals subscriptions and not just our database subscriptions? Because we have already focused on database cancellations and broken up the majority of our large journal packages during the last few years due to budget shortages. This time we wanted to incorporate into our review process all of the library resources with low demand to allow for smart purchases of high-demand resources in the future. Also, this all-encompassing cancellation push allowed liaisons to be made aware of all of the resources in their subject areas to better facilitate their outreach efforts with faculty on campus. CRITERIA: In an effort to provide an objective method for identifying the most likely candidates for cancellation by subject liaisons, various criteria, or parameters, were set by our Assistant Dean for Collections. A title was flagged for liaison review if it met at least one of these criteria: > $5/Use; Used < 50/Year; Total Cost (Print) > $400; Total Cost (E) > $1,000; Overlap w/Other Sources; & Mono Series Cancelled.
- 7-Step Journal Review Process: STEP 1: June 1st – July 7th (~5 weeks) – Electronic Resources & Acquisition Services (ERAS) prepared and compiled data for the upcoming journal review process. ERAS prepared two master lists for all active journal subscriptions, one for print and one for electronic. The master lists were posted on SharePoint for liaisons to access so that they could mark the journals in their subject areas for the first round of cancellations. STEP 2: July 8th – July 21st (~2 weeks) – Liaisons reviewed their own subjects and marked their decisions on SharePoint for first cut. During this period of time, the liaisons could seek additional information from us to aid them in their decision-making process.. STEP 3: July 22nd – August 12th (~3 weeks) - Our Assistant Dean for Collections reviewed the liaisons’ decisions and talked with most of them about additional titles for possible cancellations in their subject areas. A final list of candidates for cancellation was developed.
- STEP 4: Aug. 6th – Aug. 12th (~1 week) ERAS prepared two new “lists of journals to be cancelled” in SharePoint and a combined list for posting on the LibGuide, so that academic faculty and library liaisons could view them in order to dispute any titles on these lists. STEP 5: August 13th – Sept 5th (~4 weeks) – This was the dispute period for academic faculty to review all of the journals marked for cancellation and to register a dispute through library liaisons if they wanted to retain the journal(s). STEP 6: Sept. 6th – Sept. 14th (~1 week) - Our Assistant Dean for Collections finalized the journal cancellation list, allowing some titles to be added back in. STEP 7: Sept. 15th – ERAS notified subscription agents and individual publishers of our journal cancellations for FY2014-15 and provided them with an Excel spreadsheet for inputting into their own systems. The due date to subscription agents for our annual renewals was graciously extended from end the of August to the middle of September 2014 this year.
- We dreamed big. We said to ourselves that we wanted to make this so easy for liaisons that they would BEG us to do it year after year!! Well, the key here is to make it easy for liaisons to review and make decisions. So we gathered a lot of data and presented them in a way that allowed liaisons to only focus on reviewing content. Our two master journal lists included several data groups: 1. Review Indicators: A title was flagged for liaison review if it met at least on these criteria. 2. Liaison Decisions 3. Basic Data 4. Title Relationship 5. Title Links 6. Additional Data 7. Admin Data
- There are 4 components in managing this project. Data Source Computing Workflow Management Communication Communication -- Our Assistant Dean for Collections created a LibGuide on our library website containing all of the pertinent information needed by liaisons and separate links to the SharePoint lists. He also conducted two group meetings explaining budgetary reasons for running a complete subscription review project and the steps for marking their decisions within these lists.
- This is a screenshot of our e-journal review list on SharePoint.
- Our liaisons were pleased with the reviewing method we came up with. Then, they asked another question….
- Since we asked liaisons to focus on reviewing content only, we didn’t specify a percentage to cut across subjects. But we monitored how much cancellation amount was proposed by each subject liaison in each of their subject areas. This was to make sure that the pain was shared by everyone.
- A balancing act between continuous reviews for cancellations and smart purchases of new resources.
- The thought of doing a cancellation project of this magnitude every year or so doesn’t really appeal to us. So we want to work on our foundation and get it in shape. We want to incorporate collection review activities into regular workflows. We are putting our efforts in 3 areas.
- Planning for certain future cuts is a moving target for us. The key? To us, it’s to establish a sustainable review system and to remain flexible.