A Feasibility Study of a Unified Library Management System for NHS Scotland - A Progress Report Laura McCaig, Information Manager, E-Library Communicators Meeting, 16 December 2003

Introduction Basis of feasibility study Models of unified systems Current picture of NHS Scotland Libraries / Questionnaire responses Conclusions and future plans

Basis of feasibility study Integrated service development Common elsewhere in the UK Facilitate resource sharing Reduce duplication of effort

Basis of feasibility study (continued) Determine the current picture Identify associated benefits and costs Incorporate into business case for long term development

Examples of unified library management systems in action Physical Model Z39.50 OLIB7

Physical Model - Oxford University Union Catalogue (OLIS) Single library system for 104 libraries associated with the University of Oxford ‘Subcatalogues’ operate as local systems Some library administration aspects are customisable Centralised technical support required

Z39.50 an interoperability protocol for Information Retrieval enables communication between computer systems possible solution? possible problems?

Public Libraries, an example Ayrshire Libraries Forum –Interlending agreement between the public libraries and the University of Paisley –Intend to include other member libraries (medical, school etc)

Ayrshire Libraries Forum (continued) –Z39.50 protocol allows concurrent searching of member library catalogues (various versions) –Ayrshire “clump” searched first so that borrowing/lending of material can remain local.

University Libraries - CAIRNS Project Geographically distributed, centrally co-ordinated virtual union catalogue Based on Z39.50 standard Encompassing 20 servers at 13 sites utilising systems from 4 different suppliers.

Other NHS Regions South and West Workforce Development Confederation Knowledge Resources Management System - SWISH Single system and catalogue ‘managed’ by Fretwell-Downing Informatics (OLIB7)

SWISH (continued) Union catalogue available at Benefits include: –‘State-of-the-art’ information provision –pan-regional integrated system –knowledge management functions

Conclusions from these examples Remote management is achievable Distributed system works No loss of local management autonomy It can be done!

ULMS Questionnaire Sent to representatives in 86 Libraries Responses from 54 Libraries across Scotland 63% response rate

Standalone versus Networked

Internet Access

What do you see as the main advantages of your current system?

What do you see as the main disadvantages of your current system?

Current LMS in use

Type of LMS in use

Length of LMS use

Changing LMS in future?

Subject Heading Authority Files

What classification system is in use?

E-Library Print resources NOT second best to electronic resources Local resources NOT second best to national resources Integrated system required

Demonstration

Cost-Effectiveness Studies Current Holdings Book Loans

Current Holdings (from survey)

Current Holdings (2)

Summary of cost-effectiveness Approximate 100-fold increase in book collection available to library services and users.

Summary (continued) If a library wished to increase its collection to 400,000 items, then it would cost approximately £16M to do so (based on average book costs).

Summary (continued) Approximate 23-fold increase in material available to library service and users

British Library Book Loans - details taken from the Library & Knowledge Service Development Network Statistical Return

BL Book Loan Summary

Summary (continued) By offering access to a greatly increased bookstock tailored to NHS needs, a ULMS would significantly reduce BL borrowing costs For example, maintenance costs of £20K per year plus 50% reduction on BL borrowing would be highly cost-effective. There are significant amounts of grey literature and patient leaflets in the system.

Questionnaire findings - in more detail: Health Promotion Libraries NHS - University Library Partnerships Common services

Health Promotion Libraries HPLib most common Not Z39.50 compatible “Future calendar booking” feature essential

NHS - University Library Partnerships Already using a large LMS linked to the University Cannot warrant a change of system Open Access Approach necessary

Common Services Catalogue and Circulation Modules Inter-Library Loan Module Statistics To provide best possible service to end user Build system around ILL system?

Z39.50 Survey results

Z39.50 compatible?

What do you consider to be the vital features of a Library Management System for your service?

Perceived Advantages of a ULMS

What do you see as the main potential advantages of a unified system?

Cataloguing

On average 1 staff member spends 16 hours cataloguing per month Recognised as a significant part of the job. Need for guidelines or a support network?

Perceived Disadvantages of a ULMS

What do you see as the main potential disadvantages of a unified system?

Additional information or comments on the questionnaire or project

The current picture of NHS Scotland Library Management Systems Variance in service provision Lack of I.T. service in some areas Variable Internet Access Lack of consistency

The current picture (continued) No system-wide approach to management/access of physical resources in several NHS Boards Survey findings suggest scope for improving use of resources across the NHS

The current picture (continued) Synergies to be realised through a more coherent approach Many willing to participate in such a system

Summary/Conclusions Knowledge Management - catalogue has a central role Hybrid system Essential components were determined

Essential components already identified: Cataloguing Circulation (plus Health Promotion Future Booking) Interlibrary Loan Requesting and Administration Ability Federated system under Local Management Administration

Example of federated system in practice

Practicalities of project for the future: Formal Option Appraisal Piloting/testing Central cataloguing standards agreed ‘Permission to lend’ decision Phased approach of initial project

Future requirements Write up of feasibility study Vendor demonstrations/quotes Creation of initial pilot group Already included in future budget requirements

Thank you for listening!