Sharing Our Collections : Looking to the Future

Sharing Our Collections : Looking to the Future Sponsored by the LLAMA SASS / RUSA STARS Cooperative Remote Circulation Committee

Sharing Our Collections : Looking to the Future Flexibility and Collaboration : Floating Collections in the Arapahoe Library District Janet Schneider, Smoky Hill and Eloise May Libraries, Manager of Programming and Customer Service --Public Library consortia member Ebook Collection Sharing : The Orbis Cascade Demand Driven Acquisitions Project Linda Di Biase, Orbis Cascade Alliance Demand Driven Acquisitions Program --Academic Library consortia member The Next Generation ILS : How Will It Support Collection Sharing in the Future? Carmit Marcus, Ex Libris Director of Product Management and Partnerships--ILS Vendor representative Sponsored by the LLAMA SASS / RUSA STARS Cooperative Remote Circulation Committee

Floating Collections in the Arapahoe Library District Janet Schneider Smoky Hill and Eloise May Libraries, Manager of Programming and Customer Service

Why Floating Collections? • More effective use of collection dollars • Savings due to reduced wear and tear on collection • Decreased deliveries between libraries • Decreased handling of individual items by library staff • Materials on shelf and ready to be circulated sooner • Need to purchase fewer copies = able to purchase more titles • Constantly changing on-shelf collections=more variety • Ergonomic strain is reduced • Patrons help define collections at their local library • So how did we get there?

Successful Implementation Successful Implementation = Internal & External Collaboration At every level within the organization

Getting There • Our Decision-Making Model • Responsibility rests with one individual in management • To make the decision • To communicate the decision • To ensure that the decision is supported • Why? • To avoid consensus decision-making • And Then…..

First Steps Collaborating and Overcoming Obstacles Begins!

Collaborative Steps Research completed to guide decision-making Director of Library Services decides to implement Collaboration begins with: Executive Director Deputy Director Library Services Director Administrative Services Director Library Services Managers (5 people) Administrative Services Managers (4 people) To review the decision and provide input for changes

Collaborative Steps • Next Stop – Leadership Council • Consisting of the previous management group • Plus supervisors and coordinators • Input gathered and decision finalized • And then…

Collaborative Steps • Next Stop – All Staff of Arapahoe Library District • Decision is announced to all staff • Informational purposes • Not for discussion – that comes as we begin • implementation • And then…the work of project collaboration • begins!

Collaboration and Implementation • Step One: Convene Implementation Team • 5 people identified in critical areas of the organization • Step Two: Decide who to involve • Who are they and what role do they play in the • organization?

Collaboration and Implementation • Who? • Library Material Services (Tech Services) including: • Collection librarians • Catalogers and processers • Couriers • Vendors • Digital Services (IT) • Millennium Administrator

Collaboration and Implementation • Who? • Library Staff: • Librarians • Patron Service Specialists • Materials Handlers (Pages) • Have We Forgotten Anyone?

Collaboration and Implementation • How Will We Reach Everyone? • Road Shows – to all libraries & to Support Services • The implementation team visited all of the facilities • We knew we didn’t have all the answers • We shared what we knew from the research • We listened to concerns and questions

Collaboration and Implementation • Did We Learn Anything? • YES! • We identified the concerns that staff had and as a result: • We changed the paging priority on our paging lists • We began a blog for anyone to post on • We developed a list of FAQ’s and posted the answers • as soon as we had the answer

Collaboration & Overcoming Obstacles • The first step in overcoming obstacles is to acknowledge them • -all part of the collaboration process • What were the obstacles? • Required a basic paradigm shift in how we delivered service • Overcoming the long-held concept of discrete collections by • location and and moving to a District-wide collection • Perceived collection imbalances and redistribution process • Trust among staff at different libraries – “What will they do to • us?” • Shifting workloads and work responsibilities • Collaboration was the key to overcoming the • obstacles!

Collaboration From Beginning to End…& Beyond Are we done with collaboration and floating our collection? No – we are now in the maintenance phase and collaboration is more important than ever!

Ongoing Collaboration • Between: • Collection Librarians and Library Staff @ all levels • Library staff @ each facility – for collection • maintenance and redistribution • Couriers and library staff

Positive Outcomes through Collaboration • Launch of floating collections was a non-event • Library staff more aware of overall collection • Library staff more invested in collection • Collection is viewed as a District-wide resource • Benefits of floating have been achieved

In Closing • If you have more questions about the process of • collaboration in implementing floating collections or • about floating collections in general • @ Arapahoe Library District contact: • Janet Schneider • jschneider@ald.lib.co.us • 303-792-8940

Demand-Driven Acquisitions in a Consortial Environment The Orbis Cascade Alliance Experience Linda Di Biase, DDA Team Chair

Orbis Cascade Alliance 37 academic libraries in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington • 6 community colleges • 16 private 4-year colleges • 14 public 4-year colleges (large & small) • 1 Health Sciences institution • Total FTE: 250,000+ • No central funding source

The Cooperative Vision and E-books? The Alliance had a vision of “many libraries, one collection” BUT • Individual libraries were purchasing single e-book titles or collections • Purchased e-books were not available to all Alliance libraries

The Vision and E-books: New Directions In 2010 ... • E-book Investigation Team formed • Team recommends EBL’s DDA model, in partnership with YBP, our preferred book vendor • Alliance Council charges Implementation Team

Implementation Team Charge • Leverage existing relationship with YBP to create “an entirely new e-book consortial purchasing model” • Address access, collection development, financial & technical issues • Develop equitable funding model • Evaluate to determine ongoing viability

Initial Funding • $231,000 • All libraries participate • Funds collected based on familiar model used for e-resource purchases • Contributions range from $2.5K to $15K

DDA Pilot on FastTrack! • January 2011: First team meeting • July 2011: Implementation date! In between ... • 15 publishers come on board • Profile set up with YBP • Workflows mapped for discovery options • Training offered to public service & technical service librarians

Spending Plan • Impacted by content pool, short-term loan (STL) threshold, and negotiated multiplier • Initial content pool: 1,700 titles (all subjects, $250 cap) • Initial STL threshold: 10 • Multiplier of 5

DDA Pilot – Course Change The problem: Spending at a far lower rate than predicted • September: STL trigger to purchase lowered to 5 • October: 10,000 records added to the pilot (2009-2010 imprints) • November: Council extends pilot to July 2012 with a further $231K

Challenges • Range of experience with e-books & DDA among libraries; marketing issue • Differing perceptions of value • Technical issues • Constant need to monitor expenses

Opportunities • Decrease requesting activity for p-books with its associated costs • Libraries can avoid p-/e- duplication via YBP if they choose • Next generation ILS may help • Demonstrate to publishers that we don’t want e-journal “big deal” model for e-books

From Pilot to Program! • Jan.-Feb. 2012: Pilot evaluation • Feb. 2012: Team recommends ongoing program, proposes choice of annual budgets: $550K (status quo) or $1 M (expansion) • Change funding model to 30% even split/35% FTE/35% materials budget • Council agrees to program with FY13 budget of $750K, increasing to $1M in FY14

Not Out of the Woods Yet ... • Projected to run out of $$ in May • Raised STL purchase threshold back to 10 • Considered suppressing discovery of pre-2011 content, HOWEVER ... • Discrepancies btwn EBL & OCLC pub dates • Suppression easily achieved in 1 day in local catalogs, but longer using OCLC’s KB • Bottom line: Public Svcsconsequences unacceptable

Resolution • $30K bridge loan from Alliance • Fiscal realities will inform future expansion of DDA content

Some Statistics (July 2011-May2012) • 15,527 titles available to users • ~ 100 new titles added per week • 482 titles purchased • 9,814 titles have been accessed 70,500 times (this includes free browsing) • 7,128 titles had 17,621 STLs • $472,228 spent

Spend by Week Retro load $30K infusion STL drop 5 STL increase 10

In Closing • Thanks to Greg Doyle for some slides • For more information, go to: http://www.orbiscascade.org/index/demand-driven-acquisitions-pilot • Or contact: • Greg Doyle, Alliance ER Coordinator gdoyle@uoregon.edu • Linda Di Biase, DDA Team Chair ldibiase@uw.edu

The Next Generation ILS : What Is the Future of Collection Sharing? Carmit Marcus - Director of Product Management and Partnerships, Ex Libris

Future Collection Sharing Background New efficiencies in resource sharing Joint collection development

The challenge • Maximize cooperation, integration and sharing between institutions in a network, while supporting each institution’s particular workflows and standards, and maintaining local privacy and ownership of data • Standardizing and streamlining the connection points to make them seamless and reliable, regardless of the participating library systems

What is a collaborative network? • Group of institutions with relationships/collaboration in a specific library business area (e.g. collection development, resource sharing, remote storage) • Each institutions can be part of many networks in multiple business areas

Two forms of collaboration • Collaboration can be doneon: • Data - Institutions can work together by exposing and/or sharing their data and providing services for this data • Processes - Institutions can work together by coordinated process and/or creating joint processes to gain efficiencies

The Alma approach • Institutions will make use of a collaborative zone, where shared data will be managed • Each institution manages its private (library) zone, using its internal standards and workflows • Each institution controls what of its data it is willing to share with other network members

Resource Sharing Collection sharing is incorporated within the Alma Fulfillment framework Goals of Smart Fulfillment Extend and simplify services for end users - systems and standards become transparent Improve traditional circulation, link resolution, and access management processes Reduce and eliminate ownership and format constraints Highlight immediately available resource Maximize integration with other systems Shape Collection Development

End user experience

Joint collection development Supporting Selection Gaining efficiencies in the acquisition processes New acquisition method - PDA

Sharing Our Collections : Looking to the Future