PBA: A Statistics-Based Method to Allocate Academic Library Materials Budgets

1. PBA: A Statistics-Based Method to Allocate Academic Library Materials Budgets Wanda V. Dole Washburn University LISU August 2002

2. Outline • Allocation systems and formulae • Percentage Based Allocation (PBA) • PBA at Stony Brook, 1993-1998 • PBA at Washburn, 2002 • Conclusions

3. Allocation Systems & Formulae • Vast literature • Three basic methods • Allocation formulae • Historical method • PBA

4. Literature of Allocation: Review • German & Schmidt (2001) • Rein (1993) • Budd (1991) • Packer (1988) • Werking (1988) • Sellen (1987) • Sanders (1983) • Yunker and Covey (1980) • Schad (1979)

5. Literature of Allocation Formulae • More theory than practice • Allocation Formulae • NOT scientific formulae (Shirk, 1984) • Often akin to Rube Goldberg contraptions: “fascinating to watch, but overly elaborate means to ends.” (Lowry, 1992)

6. Allocation Formulae • Decline in use • 73.3% of colleges in 1940’s (Muller, 1941) • 67.5% of SE academic libraries (Greaves, 1974) • 41% of academic libraries in 1989 (Budd and Adams, 1989) • 40% in 1995 (Tuten & Jones, 1995)

7. PBA • Proposed by Genaway (1986) • Based on assumption that “any method used to allocate university-wide resources will ultimately be reflected at one point – the budget line given to each college or department”

8. Based on Instructional & Departmental (I&DR) Budget • Departmental I&DR/Total University I&DR = PBA • PBA x Library Materials Budget = Allocation per Department

9. PBA • Literature contains no mention of implementation • Young (1992) rejects it as a proposed, but not reported at implemented, “formula” • Rein (1993) cites it as example of “allocation without formula”; calls it “seductive.” Reports it is “untested”.

10. PBA at Two University Libraries Large academic research (Stony Brook) Small comprehensive university (Washburn)

11. SUNY Stony Brook • Carnegie Research I • 20,855 students; 1849 faculty • Melville Library + 6 branches • 2 million vols. • 6117 print serials • 1960s & 1970s: rapid growth, generous funding • 1980s & 1990s: reduced funding, slow growth

12. Stony Brook Identifies Need for Rational Allocation System • Strategic Planning, 1991-92 • ARL/OMS Collection Analysis Project • Develop rational allocation system • CAP ,1992-93, identifies • Problems in allocation system • Objectives • Method for solution

13. CAP Allocations Task Force • Described how allocation decisions are made • Identified influences on allocation decisions and conflicts that will arise from changes • Analyzed strengths and weaknesses of current practices • Examined serials to monographs ratio

14. Findings: Problems in the Allocation System • Did not reflect priorities of the University • Could not adapt to fluctuations in funding • Was not based on objective criteria

15. Task Force Recommendations • Find an allocation SYSTEM that solves the problems • Recommended system: PBA • Implement the system

16. Recommendation: Adapt PBA to the University • Review University budget and calculate percentage received by each unit • Apply these percentages to acquisitions budget • Make location adjustments

17. PBA at Stony Brook • Institutional data • Historical acquisitions data: serials & monograph expenditures by fund code • University’s Operating Budget (annual publication): Instructional & Department Research (I &D R) • Calculations • I & DR percentages are calculated (=PBA) • PBA percentages applied to budget • Last year’s expenditures percentages

18. PBA at Stony Brook • Modifications • Acquisitions budget: • 10-15% set aside for access • 5% set aside for contingencies • Arbitrary PBA established for library depts. • PBA cannot vary from from previous year’s expenditure by more than 10%

19. PBA at Washburn • Carnegie Master’s University I • 6200 students; 250 faculty • Mabee Library + one branch (CRC) • 345,000 vols. • 385 print serials

20. PBA at Washburn • Strategic Planning, 2000-02 • ARL/OMS Collection Analysis Project • Develop rational allocation system • CAP ,2001-02, identifies • Problems in allocation system • Objectives • Method for solution

21. CAP Allocations Task Force • Described how allocation decisions are made • Identified influences on allocation decisions and conflicts that will arise from changes • Analyzed strengths and weaknesses of current practices • Examined serials & monographs

22. Washburn: Problems in the Allocation System • Complex and old (1980) formula for monographic allocations • No system or formula used for serials allocations • No system for e-resources • No system for ILL/DD

23. PBA at Washburn • Institutional data • Historical acquisitions data: serials & monograph expenditures by fund code • University’s Operating Budget (annual publication): Instructional & Department Research (I &D R) • Calculations • I&DR percentages calculated (=PBA) • PBA percentages x materials budget • Comparison with previous year’s actual expenditures

24. Washburn: PBA Results • Unexpected discrepancies between University I&DR % and University “Priorities” • Discrepancies do not follow a pattern • Discrepancies • Specific to Washburn? • Related to size and mission of institution?

25. Conclusions • PBA at Stony Brook: partial success • Allocations closer to campus priorities • PBA at Washburn: uncertain • Allocations NOT closer to priorities

26. Conclusions • PBA works at one research library • PBA appears not to work at one master’s I university • Results may be • Specific to these two libraries • Related to size and mission of the library • Needs more research: replication of PBA at other libraries