Presentation on theme: "Using ILL Reports to Develop Local and Regional Library Collections Diane Carroll, Oregon Health & Science University Library May 5,"— Presentation transcript:
Using ILL Reports to Develop Local and Regional Library Collections Diane Carroll, email@example.com Oregon Health & Science University Library May 5, 2006
Overview – Focus on journals Local ILL data Accreditation reports Evaluate past journal addition and cancellation decisions Current and archival journal selection when merged with other data Electronic journal revolution and ILL Print versus electronic Those pesky licenses Regional collection development and consortial ILL load leveling
Annual ILL data analysis Process When: every July, request a report of the last 18 months of interlibrary loans borrowed What data elements: Title, ISSN and year
Step 1: Clean up the data Challenges: Full title or abbreviations Print or electronic ISSN Punctuation “The” All efforts to clean up the data appreciated PhotoJournalTitle PhotoJou rnalYearISSN Hematologic Pathology1995 Behavioral sciences & the law.19950735-3936 Behaviour & information technology.19990144-929X Curr Pain Headache Rep200415313433 J Clin Gastroenterol19910192-0790 journal of clinical gastroenterology19950192-0790 The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.19960001-4966
Step 2: Subtotal the data Put titles in alphabetical order - EXCEL – Data – Subtotal About 8,000 articles were borrowed From about 3,000 different journals Graph the data
8,000 articles borrowed from 3,000 different journals Graph of the annual ILL data
Table of annual ILL data 1/2004 - 6/2005 % of titles borrowed Articles borrowed8054 Different journal titles borrowed2953 Journal titles borrowed > 10 times1013% Journal titles borrowed 6 to 10 times2037% Journal titles borrowed < 6 times264990%
Use: Evaluate past collection decisions In 2003, OHSU Library canceled 45 journal titles Compare annual ILL data with past cancellations TitleNumber of ILLs Japanese Journal of Physiology3 Journal of Allied health2 13 titles1
Step 3: Evaluate annual ILL data by year Sort titles by year of the article Create two categories: −1995 to current −Pre 1995 (up through 1994) Subtotal each category Graph the data
ILL borrowed pre and post 1995 1995 to present Pre-1995 25% of articles were pre-1995
Step 4. Merge into the Serials Decision Database Contains all current subscriptions and other titles under consideration for addition to the collection To cumulate information needed to assess the collection in one place so it can be manipulated to create reports. To organize the information in a way that the Collection Development Committee can make decisions and not be overwhelmed by data. To provide objective information to be reviewed subjectively by the Collection Development Committee.
Collection Development Section A - Title B - Current subscription, free or blank C - Library holder of current subscription and details on format D - Ejournal provider F - Title recommendations (surveys, requests) G, H - Number of articles written by or cited by OHSU authors in the journal (Source: ISI) I, J - OHSU ILL borrowing K - Number of PDF/full text downloads L - Calculated data- Cost/use
Use: Defining importance of title in the serials decision database High Use (1) Medium Use (2) Low Use (3) Number of articles by OHSU authors in the journal from 2002 to 5/2005 >105-102-4 Number of articles cited by OHSU authors from 2002 to 5/2005 >4010-405-9 Requests from faculty=>1 Full text/PDF downloads>25040-250<40 Interlibrary loan borrowed from articles dated 1995 to present over the last 18 mo. >156-155
Priority 1-3 Priority 1 - High use Current subscriptions to be renewed or titles to be considered for addition Priority 2 - Medium use Increase/decrease in use No subscription – value if available in consortial offer Priority 3 - Low use Consider for cancellation Little value in consortial offering Current subscriptions No subscription 179978 2502584 33181,165 Total16191827
Use: Selection of electronic archival collections Merge use information for older titles owned and not owned ILL data from pre-1995 Paging data from off-site storage Add to serials decision database and sort by publisher Identify archival collections
Electronic access is by negotiated licenses A license is a grant of rights by a publisher who owns or has rightful possession of a property. A license is not a sale of property. What the parties agree will over-ride underlying law – mutual agreement. If Fair Use principles are not incorporated into license or are denied, copyright laws will not apply. From ARL workshop on Licensing Electronic Information Resources August 2000
Print versus electronic journal rights Print 1.Who can use the library is a local decision (open to the public or not). 2.No need to establish venue and governing law for breach of contract. 3.When title is canceled, it stays on the shelve. Electronic 1.Authorized users are defined in a license – by category and number. 2.Need to establish venue and governing law in case of breach of contract. 3.When a title is canceled, you may lose access rights.
Print versus electronic journal rights Print 4.Add a title - receive the current issues. 5.Fair Use and Copyright laws apply. 6. All pay same institutional rate for subscription. Electronic 4. Add a title - often receive back issues. 5. Must mutually agree on rights and restrictions (contract law). 6. Fee could be based on use, FTE, number of campuses, or Carnegie Institutional Tiers or phase of the moon.
ILL from electronic journal Is it allowed? Negotiated right More commonly allowed but still restrictive in method of delivery. Union list – if e-only, must have ILL rights defined in license. By what delivery method? Fax or mail Ariel-like – secure transmission Records, rules and requirements Attached to an e-mail – unsecured electronic transmission is a right rarely permitted
Communicating ILL rights to library staff Rights and restrictions negotiated in licenses need to be communicated to users and library staff on a title/database level. Electronic Resource Management products.
Before Electronic Access… Hold Print subscription Do not hold Interlibrary loan Collection
After Electronic Access… Access online-no archival rights Hold Online subscription Open access online Do not hold 1.Aggregator collections 2.Consortial title sharing agreements, “Big Deals”, Unique Title Lists 3.“Pay per view” or “OnDemand” articles Hold Print subscription Collection = Ownership Electronic Document Delivery Interlibrary loan
Article Supplier Analysis In April 2005, the Alliance-cdmc reported on the results of analyzing over 17,000 ILL requested by Alliance members in November 2004. The purpose was to evaluate the usefulness of the Summit catalog for holdings information. This study was posted on the web at http://www.orbiscascade.org/staffhome/CDMCindex.h tml. http://www.orbiscascade.org/staffhome/CDMCindex.h tml
Cost of ILL service to Alliance members Estimated expense of borrowing and supplying ILL for one year is $4.3 million not including ILL charges and copyright fees.
ILL and other data collected Data collected by Alliance- cdmc included: Institution requesting the article ISSN of journal Year of publication OCLC symbol of library that supplied the article Information enriched for additional analysis: Title and ISSN if missing Publisher/ ejournal provider
Use: Regional ILL data To look for opportunities for electronic journal access to replace interlibrary loan transactions. −To provide faster access to all Alliance library users −To lower costs of Alliance libraries for both borrowing and lending −To load level article interlibrary To identify which products/publisher agreements would bring the most value to Alliance membership.
ILL requests included in this study Attempted to located publisher or ejournal provider for 14,481 articles Did not locate publisher information for 3,134 articles Articles prior to 1995 3,572 ILL requests 54% supplied by Alliance Articles 1995 to present 10,909 ILL requests 47% supplied by Alliance (5,083)
Regional ILL Analysis of the ILL data by provider has been useful in identify agreements that may save money and help to load level ILL within the Alliance. When making decisions on ejournal offers, staff are encouraged to consider the full costs and benefits (increased access, electronic delivery, lower cost, ILL savings, etc.).
Conclusions Your efforts and attention to detail will make ILL data more accurate. Local ILL data can assist: − Prediction of future journal needs of the institution − Evaluation of the quality of past collection decisions − Target back file collection purchases. Regional ILL data can be used to guide consortia members to investigate ejournal packages that will help load level ILL.