Together we are Stronger: A Cooperative Approach to Managing Print Collections

Dr. Clem Guthro, Director, Colby College
Libraries & Matthew Revitt, Program
Manager, Maine Shared Collections
Strategy
Together we are Stronger: A
Cooperative Approach to Managing
Print Collections
www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

Maine, United States
Maine

The Library Context in Maine
 Academic Libraries:
 University of Maine, University of Southern Maine, and
University of New England
 Colby, Bates and Bowdoin Colleges
 7 community and 9 small private colleges
 Public Libraries
 265 public libraries
 2 flagship publics–Bangor and Portland
 Maine State Library
 Maine Law and Legislative Reference Library
 Special libraries
 23 hospital libraries
 2 independent laboratories (Jackson and Bigelow)

The Library Context in Maine
 Maine InfoNet- Maine Libraries, Maine Citizens.
Connected!

U.S. Print Retention Projects
 West Storage Trust – Western US – Journals
 CIC – Large Midwest universities – Journals
 ReCAP – Columbia, Princeton, NYPL
 HathiTrust
 Scholars Trust -AESERL & WRLC– Journals
 North East Regional Library Print Management
Project– Monographs and Journals
 Maine Shared Collection Strategy – Monographs
& Journals
 Center for Research Libraries

Why Print Retention in Maine?
 Library collaboration is the norm in Maine
 Larger Libraries Group – 9 largest libraries with ¾
of the total print collection. 100 years of
collaboration
 Colby, Bates and Bowdoin are consciously
building a shared collection of new print materials
and e-resources
 MaineCat has encouraged resource sharing
 State-wide delivery – 1.25 millions items/year

Project Background
 Originated with the Larger Libraries Group
 Most libraries were running our of space and
unlikely to get additional storage
 Wanted a shared approach to managing legacy
print collections for the long-term
 Looking to be leaders in the print collection space
 Needed grant money to support

Project Partners

Grant Proposal
Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS)
grant of $821,065 to create a shared print
collections strategy:
 Create a collection analysis system to analyze
the collections
 Examine the presence of large scale digital
collections (HathiTrust and Internet Archive) as a
determiner of what to keep in print
 Develop a strategy to make retention decisions at
scale
 Integrate Print-On-Demand for large scale digital
collections where local print copies are
unavailable
 Integrate E-book-On-Demand for large scale

Grant Focus
 Focus is monographs and journals (Government
documents are excluded)
 The goal is to determine which volumes should
be retained long-term and by whom
 Libraries may discard materials or not, once
retention decisions are made (downsizing is not
the predominant focus)
 Provide a framework for other libraries to
participate once the initial grant period is
complete
 Expose our retention decisions to the world
 We want to be part of the national conversation

Project Management
 Project Team
 Matthew Revitt – Project Manager
 Clem Guthro – Colby College (representing the private college
 Deb Rollins – University of Maine (representing the universities)
 Barbara McDade – Bangor Public (representing the public libraries)
 James Jackson Sanborn – Maine Infonet
 Sara Amato – Contract systems librarian
 Director’s Council
 Collection Development Committee
 Technical Services and Systems Committee
 National Advisory Board
 Lizanne Payne – nationally known Shared Print Consultant
 Constance Malpas – Program Officer, OCLC Office of Research
 Robert Keift – College Librarian, Occidental College and collection development guru
http://www.maineinfonet.net/mscs/about/people/

MSCS Objective #1
 Develop a strategy for a state-wide, multi-type
library program for managing, storing and
preserving print collections among public and
private institutions to achieve greater efficiencies
and extend the power of every dollar invested in
collections and library facilities.
 Requires collection and use analysis of print
collection and the development of a collections
management, steward and preservation model.

What Do We Want to Learn from
the Data?
 What monographs should be designated for long-
term retention?
 What is an equitable and/or common-sense
distribution of retention responsibilities?
 What monographs are candidates for
incorporating into Print On-Demand/E-book-On-
Demand services by virtue of HathiTrust or
Internet Archive public domain material?
 What monograph copies (by library) could
optionally be deselected, once retention decisions
have been finalized?

How Do We Answer That?
 Number of copies of a particular work owned by
partner libraries
 Number of circulating copies
 Number of times a title circulated and date of last
circulation
 Number of titles uniquely held in the
group/Maine/OCLC WorldCat (U.S. only)
 Subject strengths across the group and the state
 Titles represented in HathiTrust and Internet
Archive
 Overlap between general collections and special
collections www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

Data Required for Analysis
 Usage
 Total checkout and total
renewal
 Year to date circulation
 Last year circulation
 Last checkin
 Out date
 Last out date
 Reserve notes
 Internal use count
 Icode2 (Contributed to
union catalog)
 Circulation Status
 Identification
 Item record number
 Created date
 Barcode
 Itype (value in the item
that defines how it
circulates)
 Volume and copy
 Item call number
 Location

Issues With the Data Set
 Accurately comparing data required OCLC
reclamation:
 Approximately 2.9 million records sent
 More involved process than originally thought, but
successfully cleaned up libraries’ records
 OCLC circulation data report—data
inconsistencies
 Constant change—Ongoing library withdrawals &
additions

Third Party Collections Analysis
Support
 OCLC WorldCat Collections Analysis Tool—
unable to meet MSCS needs & delays in
analytics product
 Investigated other products, none met our
needs—
multiple libraries, monographs & massive data
 Sustainable Collections Services (SCS) only
could meet MSCS requirements—tailored reports
& consulting support. See:
http://sustainablecollections.com/

Services Provided By
 Additional data cleaning—normalizing, de-
duping, and filling in missing data
 Matched titles to external data sources
 Consulting support
 Data reports

MSCS Group Collection Summary:
Collection Usage

Overlap within Group

MSCS Circulating Title-Holdings
by Holding Level – Circulation
Levels
295,425
208,430
393,391
341,231
232,054
403,284
374,062
204,219
267,658
-
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1 2 3+
Number of MSCS Libraries Holding Title
Zero Circulations
1-3 Circulations
1 2

Retention Scenario One
 Analyzed and took action only on titles published
pre-2003, anything published after 2003 was out
of the scope. For materials owned by only 1 or 2
partner libraries:
 Retained:
 Titles if any circulation or reserve activity
 ―Protected‖ subject titles (Maine and/or institution
specific items)
 Special Collections/Archives copies
 Unique in OCLC (only 0-9 copies in OCLC) title

Future Scenario Development
 What to do about the remaining 50% of items--
those held by 3 or more libraries?
 In addition to Scenario One criteria, needs
analysis to decide allocation among libraries:
 Circulation rates
 Available storage space
 Subject strengths
 Loan periods
 Level of commitments already made

Disclosing Retention Decisions:
The Why
 The principle of the common good
 Participating as a partner in the national print
retention world
 Allows discards where appropriate

Disclosing Retention Decisions:
The How
 National and International – OCLC WorldCat
 OCLC Shared Print symbol
 State – Central union catalog: MaineCat
 MARC 583 note pulled from OCLC
 Local –Five catalogs
 MARC 583 Action Note

Physical storage of retained
items
 MSCS chose a distributed model rather than a
centralized storage facility, which means that:
 Ownership and storage will remain with the library
 No different Interlibrary Loan workflows
 Remain requestable in both state and national
catalogs

MSCS Objective #2
 Expand access to existing digital book collections
by developing Print-On-Demand (POD) and E-
book-On-Demand (EOD) services to support
long-term management of a shared print
collection, and the integration of digital resources
with print collections.
 Requires the development of a print/digital
management model and a service model for
delivering E-book-On-Demand and Print-On-
Demand
www.maineinfonet.net/mscs/www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

Print/digital model
 MSCS libraries are using large-scale digital
collections like the HathiTrust and Internet
Archive in the management of their print
collections:
 Developing criteria for relying on digital copies as
surrogates
 HathiTrust membership
 Integrating HathiTrust Public Domain title records
into our union catalog

HathiTrust and Internet Archive
Overlap

Service delivery model
 Developing request mechanisms for:
 Delivering downloadable digital copies of public
domain titles
 Digital titles that can be printed and delivered to
library users

MSCS Objective #3
 Formalize organizational agreements, establish a
budget, and develop policies essential to the
management of shared print and digital
collections.
 Requires the development of a sustainable
business and financial models to ensure MSCS
extends beyond the grant period and original
partner libraries.

Governance and Business
Model
 A Memorandum Of Understanding has been
developed to guide the ongoing work
 An Executive Committee formed from the Maine
InfoNet Board will provide governance
 A Collections and Operations Committee will
determine retention, holding disclosure, and
access/delivery
 Membership fee set by Executive Committee
 Collection Holders
 Collection Builders
 Supporting Members

Lessons learned
 Plan for the unexpected – First Program Manager
quit after a year
 Things take longer than you think – OCLC
reclamation- almost 1 year instead of 3 months
 Things you planned to do become untenable –
Espresso book machine, creating our own
collection analysis system
 Less conservative with circulation thresholds in
retention criteria

Thank you!
matthew.revitt@maine.edu
cpguthro@colby.edu
www.maineinfonet.org/mscs/
@MESharedColls

Together we are Stronger: A Cooperative Approach to Managing Print Collections

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à Together we are Stronger: A Cooperative Approach to Managing Print Collections

Similaire à Together we are Stronger: A Cooperative Approach to Managing Print Collections (20)

Plus de Maine_SharedCollections

Plus de Maine_SharedCollections (15)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Together we are Stronger: A Cooperative Approach to Managing Print Collections