Frequently asked questions about the Serials Review Project

1. As a faculty member how can I contribute to the review process?
2. What materials are being reviewed?
3. How do I know what serials support my department?
4. Who is the Library faculty member who works with my department?
5. What is the time frame for all of this?
6. How have faculty been involved in developing the review project?
7. Why is so much emphasis being placed on continuing commitments? Doesn't the library buy a lot of books?
8. How does electronic publishing affect the review process for journals?
9. Why are the Libraries prioritizing 25% of expenditures?
10. Why are there three different priority levels within the 25% of lower priority titles?
11. Does this mean that no new subscriptions are possible?
12. What happens when a title is removed form the list of titles classed as low priority?
13. What about resources that serve more than one discipline or department. How will they be reviewed?
14. Why are the Libraries reviewing their subscriptions?
15. Are the Libraries having budget problems?
16. Is this a cancellation project?

1. As a faculty member how can I contribute to the review process?

The Libraries are seeking input from all faculty. Each department on campus has an assigned Library faculty member (current liasons & 2003 review participating liasons)and a faculty member from their own department designated as a library liaison. Library faculty will be working with their partners in the departments to engage each department in reviewing the titles it uses. Please look over lists of titles provided by library faculty liaisons and contribute your perceptions of the relative priority of various titles to support campus programs. In addition in March there will be a campus-wide posting of the lists developed by various departments to allow faculty in other departments to comment on titles of interest.

2. What materials are being reviewed?

The review covers all of the Libraries continuing commitments. This includes all print journals and almost all electronic resources. Electronic resources are mainly licensed as annual subscriptions. In addition, another category of continuing commitments is standing orders for book series of various types. The Libraries will be reviewing all of these materials, although somewhat different procedures may be applied to different categories of materials.

3. How do I know what serials support my department?

Library Faculty have been working for several years to organize serial expenditures by department where that is reasonable. Faculty can contact their liaison to obtain copies of the lists.

4. Who is the Library faculty member who works with my department?

A list of selectors (who work with departments) is available at http://www.lib.umd.edu/CLMD/CMT/managerdirectory.html

5. What is the time frame for all of this?

Subscription renewals typically occur in the summer. Electronic resources are largely renewed in late spring before the next fiscal year begins (in July). If the serial review results in any changes in subscriptions it must thus be completed well before the end of the spring semester. The review process has been organized so that lower priority titles (the bottom 25% of library expenditures) will need to be prioritized by the end of March 2003. Library faculty will be engaging in substantial amounts of data-gathering and organizational planning during the Fall. Once that groundwork has been completed faculty from outside the Libraries will have a variety of opportunities to participate in the prioritization process.

6. How have faculty been involved in the design of the review project?

Faculty play a significant role in any review of serials. The University Library Council is comprised largely of faculty members. This group recommended regular journal review and endorses the current serial review.

7. Why is so much emphasis being placed on continuing commitments? Doesn't the library buy a lot of books?

Print journal subscriptions alone account for almost half of the Libraries' materials budget. Electronic resource subscriptions account for just under 20% of the rest. With standing orders, these continuing commitments account for approximately 70% of the materials budget. While inflation rates vary some from title to title, this portion of the budget has historically inflated at an annual rate of 8-10% a year. It is thus absolutely crucial in a tight budget situation that continuing commitments be monitored closely and evaluated regularly as to the value they are providing to the campus community.

8. How does electronic publishing affect the review process for journals?

The review process will largely focus on the Libraries print journal subscriptions. At the moment, most of the Libraries' journals do not have electronic counterparts. The vast majority of electronic journals are available to the campus contingent on the maintenance of our print subscriptions. In such cases, there is no opportunity for saving funds by relying on electronic access and canceling a print subscription. In some cases there is an opportunity for modest savings by canceling print and relying only on electronic access. Savings typically are 10% of the print subscription cost in these cases. In the instances where there are opportunities to convert print subscriptions to electronic subscriptions with a cost savings, this option can be evaluated as part of the review process. In a very small number of cases it is possible to cancel print access and recoup the full cost of the print subscription. The only instances where this is possible are the Nature titles, Science, some IEEE journals, Project Muse titles, and BioOne Project titles.

9. Why are the Libraries prioritizing 25% of expenditures?

The UM Libraries need to manage serial commitments carefully even in good budget times. Even when our materials budget has been growing we have carried out serial reviews to ensure that we are using collection dollars as effectively as possible. In these times of increased budget uncertainty, the Libraries need to better understand our priorities for serials commitments, not just for a small proportion of our collection but for the collection as a whole. By seeking explicit prioritization for 25% of our serial expenditures, the Libraries will be in a strong position to understand how to use the materials budget effectively under a range of possible budget regimes. Inflation on our serial collections has been running at 8-10% per annum for more than a decade with inflation historically increasing more rapidly at times. With this in mind funding that fails to provide for inflation would have a significant impact on the effective purchasing power of the materials budget. Prior to the current budget concerns, the University Library Council recommended a three year cycle for periodical review. It is hoped that the 25% prioritization could provide adequate information for the Libraries to manage their budget through FY05 without needing to mobilize another campus-wide review effort.

10. Why are there three different priority levels within the 25% of lower priority titles?

The UM Libraries believes that all of the items identified as lesser priority are currently supporting campus needs and thus are important to our campus collections. Despite this view, the Libraries need to gather enough information to cope with possible budget restrictions over a multi-year period. It is therefore important to understand the relative priorities of various serial commitments. While an absolute prioritization of 25% of subscription expenditures is not practical, a three-tier prioritization is very helpful if it becomes necessary to make a number of cancellation decisions over time.

11. Does this mean that no new subscriptions are possible?

The UM Libraries have no funding for new subscriptions in FY03. The Libraries, however, continue to work with faculty to determine where existing subscriptions can be cancelled to free funding when new subscriptions are needed. The review project can support this process as well. Faculty are encouraged to continue to discuss needs for core materials not held by the UM Libraries with the Library faculty member working with their department.

12. What happens when a title is removed from the list of titles classed as low priority?

A title or titles of equivalent cost must be identified as lower priority.

13. What about resources that serve more than one discipline or department. How will they be reviewed?

During the review process, every attempt will be made to identify and consider the needs of any affected users of a particular title. Many titles will be presented to faculty from multiple departments for consideration. Very general titles serving a wide campus constituency will be reviewed by the Libraries' Collection Management Team rather than by specific selectors or subject teams. Finally, a composite list of all titles identified through the review process will be made available to the campus for comment during March of 2003. Any concerned faculty member will have an opportunity to offer a justification for reprioritization.

14. Why are the Libraries reviewing their subscriptions now?

As responsible collection managers, librarians regularly review the continuing commitments for purchase of materials. Continuing commitments include journal subscriptions, electronic resource subscriptions, and standing orders for series. Triennial collection-wide serial review was recommended by the University Library Council and is supported by the Provost. Journal review was last done in FY01 and would normally occur in FY04. In light of the budget pressures faced by the University of Maryland, the Libraries believe it is appropriate to initiate the serial review cycle in FY03 (academic year 02/03) and broaden the review to all continuing purchase commitments for materials.

15. Are the Libraries having budget problems?

As with other campus units, the Libraries experienced a 2% reduction of the materials budget in FY03 compared to FY02. A further cut of 5% for FY03 has now been mandated. These cuts have been managed for the short term by freezing some monographic expenditures and making some other temporary cuts. However, serials compose roughly 70% of the materials budget. Clearly the budget cannot be effectively managed for the longer term by taking cuts from only a small portion of the budget as a whole. Continuing commitments for subscriptions require a long lead time. If cancellations are required to balance the materials budget in FY04, priorities need to be identified by the spring of 2003 if they are to be used for making decisions with regard to the FY04 budget. The Libraries hope to have a robust materials budget in FY04 to support all of the existing commitments to print and electronic resources. However, serial commitments typically inflate at rates of 8-10% a year. If FY04 brings further cuts or even simply no budget growth, serial cuts will need to be implemented to balance the materials budget.

16. Is this a cancellation project?

At the moment the Libraries do not know for sure that any cancellations will be necessary. The review process is currently a prioritization project. However, the substantial investment of faculty time inside and outside the Libraries is justified by the need to be prepared for a range of possible budget situations. If further budget cuts are made for FY03 and/or FY04, cancellation will be necessary and the prioritization process will inform cancellation decisions.

return to top